June 4 Time to Reflect on Us

A public service announcement to remember June 4 at Victoria Park

We're pleased there was a reminder this morning for people to remember what happened 27 years ago in Tiananmen Square.

On a giant long white banner, appropriately hung on Lion Rock had the Chinese characters: "Never Forget June 4. See you at Victoria Park". It was apparently unfurled there at 9.10am and promptly removed by firefighters by 10am.

What's wrong with leaving a banner like that there? Seems like a good old school public service announcement for everyone to see.

Beijing's White Paper was issued in June 2014

People who remember watching the events unfold on CNN are pretty adamant about commemorating the victims every year in Victoria Park with a candlelight vigil.

But those born in Hong Kong who were too young or not even born yet have no connection to this horrific incident and feel it's time to focus on democracy in Hong Kong and not in China, as they feel that's a lost cause, and also don't have a connection the with the mainland.

They are tired of kowtowing to Beijing and feel fighting for independence is the solution.

But they are not thinking rationally. Whether they like it or not, Hong Kong is legally a part of China as of 1997, and it's quite obvious Beijing is trying to drag the city (which is kicking and screaming) to be integrated into the mainland as quickly as possible.

However independence and remembering the victims of 1989 are two different things. Twenty-seven years ago the students were protesting government corruption and called for freedom of speech, freedom of the press and restoring workers' rights.

While they may have demanded democracy, they didn't know what it was at the time, an idealistic concept they saw in the West.

Protesters took over Admiralty on September 28, 2014

In Hong Kong, our bid for democracy ended in June 2014 when Beijing issued a  white paper reiterating it had full control over the city, and said we could vote for the chief executive, but only from the two or three candidates pre-approved by Beijing.

The anger that erupted in Hong Kong resulted in the 79-day Occupy protests, which many still look back on it wistfully, when thousands of people were united for the most part peacefully for a cause.

But many think Occupy was a failure, and hence the emergence of localist groups and their more radical and violent actions, thinking provocative acts and statements will get China's attention.

And now here we are at the 27th anniversary, more fractured than ever, with the Federation of Students withdrawing participation from the annual candlelight vigil.

Division in Hong Kong is exactly what Beijing wants, bickering among ourselves so that we are too distracted to see what's really going on.

We need to be united in our cause because Occupy really freaked Beijing out. To them it was mayhem; to us it was utopia.

Radicalism only gives Beijing reasons to further clamp down on us and is that what we really want?

China's Entertaining White Paper

China likes to think its human rights record is improving every year

Every year China comes out with its white paper on the human rights situation in the country. And of course it's painted in a positive light.

This time, the paper contains some 21,000 Chinese characters and explains how economic and social development has helped improve China's human rights, particularly in entertainment.

In the report's first section, titled, "Right to Development", it says the people's cultural rights were better protected thanks to the country's burgeoning television, cartoon and film production.

Dissident Liu Xiaobo continues to languish in prison

Uh huh.

It says in 2014, China produced 429 television series, which equals to 15,983 episodes, while cartoon programming amounted to 138,496 minutes. [The accuracy of the minutes is impressive].

The report adds growth on the big screen, with China making 618 feature films, 36 of which earned more than 100 million yuan each, racking up a total of 26.9 billion yuan ($4.3 billion) last year. This, the white paper says, is a 36 percent increase from 2013.

But how is the production of TV shows, movies and cartoons related to human rights, let alone the improvement of human rights in China?

Maya Wong, Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch wasn't impressed by this year's report.

Ai Weiwei was detained for a period before being released

"The white paper has departed so much from reality that it claims that the government has made 'great achievements' on human rights are absurd," she said, noting that in 2013, the State Council's white paper cited car ownership in defense of its human rights record. "The government could have counted the number of pandas as a sign of rights progress," she said.

Ouch.

So what are we to make of this year's white paper on China's human rights?

Sounds like a lot of creative writing, and whoever wrote it should be commended for trying to paint a warm fuzzy picture of the country's human rights situation when in fact anyone who speaks out against the state is put through a sham trial and then locked up, like Liu Xiaobo, journalist Gao Yu, lawyers Xu Zhiyong and Gao Zhisheng, academic Ilham Tohti, and for a period of time Ai Weiwei.

Journalist Gao Yu was recently jailed for seven years

The recent sinking of the cruise ship in the Yangtze has led to state media being instructed to use Xinhua-approved stories, and barring everyone else from the site. The families are demanding an open investigation with the number of deaths climbing past 430, but so far their pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

Citing increased entertainment as a form of improved human rights seems such a bizarre connection, but then any way to frame China in a better light was the aim of the white paper.

What will they think of next?

Academic's Wise Words

Law professor Johannes Chan is concerned about the erosion of core values

Hong Kong is not only being divided by the haves and have nots, those pushing for Occupy Central, and others towing the Beijing line, but there's also the issue of corruption reaching further into the city than ever before.

The former dean of the University of Hong Kong's faculty of law, professor Johannes Chan Man-mun has expressed alarm at the erosion of the city's core values, saying corruption was more evident despite higher awareness of the importance of a sound legal system.

"Corruption has grown more serious. It's not even about people breaking the law; what is scarier is how corruption is seen as socially acceptable," said the academic and barrister.

As a result he is concerned about rule of law during the city's current political turmoil.

"Just the fact that a former ICAC chief [Timothy Tong Hin-ming] would attempt to explain away his actions -- this is something that would be impossible to accept in the past," he said, referring to Tong's overspending and gifts to mainland officials.

"Hong Kong's success hinges on having a complete and wholesome system of judicial independence," Chan said. "We could rely on economic prowess as an advantage 20 to 30 years ago, but that's all gone now -- the rule of law is our only advantage."

When Beijing released its white paper last month, Chan said he was "extremely angry" that judges had to "love the country and love Hong Kong".

He said this would cause the public to doubt judicial independence, adding, "The secretary of justice has the responsibility to come out and explain it."

Chan also commented on police chief Andy Tsang Wai-hung's statement that police would "enforce the law strictly as the law indicates" if the Occupy Central civil disobedience movement goes ahead. The professor said all legal systems allowed for discretion.

"Whether any law is broken is one thing, whether or not to prosecute is another," he said. Whether to prosecute or not -- it takes into account our core values, human rights and many more factors. It's not just a matter of whether it's against the law or not -- it's not black and white.

"[Society] is not just about the law -- it's about upholding core values as well. Discretion is not something the law can tell you -- and it's something society cannot be without."

Wise words from the academic, who is trying to remind us the importance of upholding rule of law in Hong Kong and that while the authorities may threaten to go by the letter of the law, there is still some leeway -- mixed with common sense -- which makes this city what it is today... though corruption is what we need to get rid of asap...

Bring It On

A screen shot with a bird and says "Occupy Central with love and peace"

Hong Kong's civic referendum on universal suffrage began at noon today. A colleague asked me where she could vote and I quickly found the site at popvote.hk.

She wanted to do it by mobile phone so we downloaded a QR code scanner on her phone before she could scan the QR code on the website and then proceed with voting.

I tried to do the same but my phone had trouble scanning the code for some bizarre reason and I ended up doing it online which was much more tedious, but was completed within minutes.

It asks voters to choose one of three proposals from the Alliance for True Democracy, People Power, and Students.

Then it asks if whether Legco should veto any reform plan that does not provide a genuine choice of candidates to the public in 2017.

In the first hour there were over 60,000 votes, and just before midnight over 400,000. Organizers were hoping for 100,000 votes and permanent residents can vote until June 29.

Even before the referendum began the website suffered an unprecedented number of cyber attacks. And when people vote, the website does warn about the cyber attacks and asks for patience if pages are slow to load.

Soon after voting began, the Chinese government immediately condemned the referendum.

"Any form of so-called 'referendum' held in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that lacks a constitutional legal basis is illegal and invalid," said a representative of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying also noted that none of the three proposals complied with the Basic Law, but residents want to broaden the nomination base from a core of a few thousand people to the wider population.

It will be interesting to see how many do vote in the coming days, but already the results are very strong.

This clearly indicates people in Hong Kong are very unhappy with the current situation and want to be able to do something about it other than march on the streets every weekend.

And their motivation to vote was probably accelerated by the release of Beijing's white paper last week when China insisted it had complete jurisdiction over Hong Kong.

Beijing may have thought it would preempt the Occupy Central but in fact added fuel to the fire. Chinese officials must be freaking out at the moment and wondering why Hong Kong people are so adamant about one man, one vote...

Yes we know the referendum is not legally binding, but we were promised universal suffrage by 2017 and by golly we're going to make sure we get it, one way or another.

I was wrong about Occupy Central starting on July 1 -- news reports say it will happen later this year. But this referendum is to see what appetite there is for the movement and over 400,000 people so far have said YES!

Legal Sector Protests with its Feet

Next Friday will be the third time in Hong Kong's history when lawyers will march in silence to protest Beijing's white paper claiming its "comprehensive jurisdiction" over the city.

Yesterday solicitor Kevin Yam, a member of the Law Society's Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights Committee proposed a vote of no confidence in society president Ambrose Lam San-keung, after he praised the document.

Yam wants to table a motion urging Lam to retract his statement, saying the white paper was a "positive document", and to file at least 75 signatures from solicitors to call for a special meeting on the paper.

Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok has urged participants to wear black for the march, that will travel from the High Court in Admiralty to the Court of Final Appeal in Central.

There have only been two similar protests by the legal sector that led to the reinterpretations of the Basic Law. Lawyers first marched in 1999 when the government asked the National People's Congress to reinterpret the Basic Law on the issue of right of abode in Hong Kong.

The other time was six years later over the term length of the new chief executive after the resignation of the first one, Tung Chee-hwa.

It will be interesting to see how many do come out to march -- if there is a huge turnout it could be a huge boost for Hong Kong and a bigger headache for Beijing...

Divide and Conquer?

Elsie Leung would like you to believe "external forces" are at work in Hong Kong

We're now wondering if Beijing's release of the white paper is a tactic to divide and conquer Hong Kong.

All kinds of groups are split about the document that claims the city is irrefutably under the authority of Beijing.

The latest is the Law Society claiming the white paper is "positive", whereas the Bar Association immediately criticized it for saying judges were on par with "administrators" like the chief executive and top officials who are expected to "love the country", and judges should take into account China's national interests and security.

This is difficult in practice because most of Hong Kong's judges are foreigners.

Or perhaps Beijing didn't get that memo?

We also have former justice minister and now deputy director of the Basic Law Committee under the National People's Congress Elsie Leung Oi-sie giving her interpretation of the white paper.

She says Beijing is concerned about the possibility of external forces at work in Hong Kong.

"The central government is worried about the country's situation," Leung said on Commercial Radio. "Hong Kong is such a free city, and many non-residents here can [engage in] activities here, so [the white paper] says we have to stay vigilant about whether external forces are meddling in Hong Kong's internal affairs.

"Hong Kong would be doomed if we engaged in a 'colour revolution'; in fact intense movements have been on the rise recently, and I think [Beijing's] worries are not groundless."

Excuse me, Ms Leung, but can you please explain what these "external forces" are?

Does she (or China) think there some kind of infiltration of Hong Kong society by foreign influences that are programming us to incite revolution through Occupy Central? Makes it sound like a plot from an espionage movie.

As far as we know, Occupy Central was the brainchild of a Hong Kong person by the name of Benny Tai Yiu-ting. He floated the idea of Occupy Central over a year ago and now, weeks before July 1 the Chinese government has mounted this campaign to try to scare local people, but in fact it has infuriated them.

If anything it is Beijing that is the "external force" creating tensions in Hong Kong. As Tai says, "We have never tried to [engage in] subversion... We are only fighting for genuine universal suffrage," he told RTHK show City Forum.

Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah has also waded into the discussion, saying the publication of the white paper was for "a small minority of people who have a vague and one-sided understanding of the Basic Law".

If it is such a minority, why the need to release the paper in such a heavy-handed way and in seven languages?

Tsang's argument is weak and same with Leung.

What other excuses are they going to throw our way before July 1?

Words of Wisdom

Will Central be occupied come July 1? Everyone's waiting to see...

A former Canadian diplomat has waded into the white paper discussion and has urged Beijing patience and allowing Hong Kong a chance for it to shape its own future.

John Higginbotham was Canada's high commissioner to Hong Kong following the Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989 until 1994. Before that he was in Beijing as trade commissioner and political counsellor.

The 70-year-old career civil servant was taken aback by the recent release of Beijing's white paper and cautions that the timing and tone of the document emphasizing China's total control over the city could spark "infectious destabilization".

"Patience and forbearance by the central government rather than dramatic actions have been the key to a successful transition in the past. Certain language and pressures could create the very things Beijing fears most about infectious destabilization in Hong Kong, as a result of its own tactical actions," he says.

"China should allow Hong Kong progressive opportunities to shape its future as a unique international city to make it an even more valuable asset to China and the world. Turning it into another Chinese city is not in China's own interests."

He added that Beijing should be "less demanding" over the issue of patriotism and obedience it expects of other local governments," Higginbotham says.

If China wants to be serious about the concept of "one country, two systems", then it has to be prepared to live with the "hurly-burly" of Hong Kong politics.

Higginbotham's words sound like sage advice, but will Beijing heed them?

The State Council could claim he is interfering in domestic affairs, but if he's a "good friend of China", perhaps it would consider his wisdom.

In the meantime we find the former diplomat's words of caution different from that of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce that was one of five that took out an advertisement in the newspaper condemning the Occupy Central movement, saying it would cripple business in the Central district.

We shall see who will prevail...

Forced to Speak Out

Training against police tactics for Occupy Central. Are they ready?

This morning I went for a long overdue haircut and the first thing my hairdresser asked me was if I was going to take part in Occupy Central.

In the few years I have known him he doesn't talk about politics. When I mentioned one year that I went to Victoria Park for the June 4 candlelight vigil, he said he wasn't into doing things like that.

But perhaps with Beijing's recent release of the white paper claiming it has complete authority over Hong Kong that he is getting worried.

"We have over 30 more years before we are completely under Chinese control and people like my and my parents' generation, we know what it was like before. But the next generation like my daughter, they won't know what changes have happened. The textbooks could even sanitize history for all we know!" he exclaimed.

Occupy Central founder Benny Tai's mantra...

He wouldn't say if he would take part or not, but he seems agitated enough to want to show his displeasure at China -- because we have the freedom to do so.

There are probably many thousands of others who feel the same.

My hairdresser went on about how most of us in Hong Kong are just concerned about making a living, and not about political rights, which he thinks is the job of politicians.

However they don't seem to be getting anywhere, particularly the pan-democrats who are fractured. It was fun at first to have people like Leung Kwok-hung or "Long Hair" shaking things up in Legco, but now some have become so radical that things have gotten way out of hand.

So people here are left to defend themselves and go out on weekend protests.

The question now is: How many will show up July 1?

In the meantime we find it amusing that Chinese Premier Li Keqiang demanded an audience with Queen Elizabeth II when he arrives in Britain next week.

Apparently the Chinese side threatened the trip would not be good if a royal visit was not in the cards.

Wonder what Li is so anxious to talk to the Queen about or is he trying to use this photo opp as a way to show his power and influence? Or bragging rights?

Surely the Queen knows what this is all about, but is gamely going along with it to serve her country which is in financial dire straits.

What if the UK didn't have the Queen in its back pocket to sweeten the deal? Prime Minister David Cameron better thank his lucky stars...