Thrown in Jail for Doing his Job

Tens of thousands gathered to reclaim Yuen Long on July 27

Today a judge sentenced a social worker to one year in jail for impeding a police operation during an anti-government protest, saying he and his peers caused chaos and "dealt a blow" to police work.

On July 27 last year, a week after the horrific attack on people by white-shirted men at the Yuen Long MTR station, protesters came out to the New Territories district to demonstrate against the police's lack of action in this incident.

At the time tens of thousands showed up to support the neighbourhood and to protest against the brutality, when the police did not approve the rally and moved to clear the protesters.

Social worker Lau sentenced to a year in jail

Lau Ka-tung, 24, and two other social workers stood in front of the police cordon, asking police officers to slow down and allow protesters to leave the area.

Lawyers for Lau said he wanted to communicate with the police because he feared officers would cause a stampede if they suddenly charged towards the protesters.

However, the defence failed to convince acting principal magistrate Don So Man-lung, who said social workers on the scene led to chaos and anger, as well as having "fundamentally dealt a blow" to police work.

The magistrate said the social workers prevented the officers from enforcing the law.

"The duty of police is not to rally alongside protesters... Police are entitled to charge at the gathering crowd and jostle protesters to break down their size," So said.

"In the present case, no one was allowed to stop the advancing officers, just as nobody should prevent police from chasing a robber."

Jail social workers to silence dissent?

How are protesters who have a right to express themselves, and to assemble, be judged on the same level as a robber?

While the defense suggested Lau be punished with a fine, Magistrate So said time in prison was more appropriate considering the magnitude of the obstruction called by Lau and his two colleagues.

This sentence made a lot of social workers upset, because they come to protests specifically to provide any legal advice, to try to negotiate between the protesters and the police, and to be a resource for those needing help during these tense and often violent incidents.

"I am extremely angry," said Cheung Chi-wai, vice-president of the Hong Kong Social Workers' General Union. He made the statement during a press conference alongside lawmakers Shiu Ka-chun and Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, both social workers by profession.

"The presence of social workers on protest scenes is both lawful and appropriate. It is not open to challenge," Cheung Chi-wai said.

It is shocking that a social worker who was not actively protesting was sentenced to a year in jail for supposedly obstructing the police from doing their work. While police were discharging their duties, so were the social workers. How are they in the wrong?

This is only the beginning. It will be sad to see more and more convictions of this nature.

Lam Lashes Out at Opposition

Carrie Lam tells people not to "demonize the new law"

Today marks the first anniversary when 2 million people marched on the streets to protest against the extradition bill. Coinciding with the date was a double rainbow that appeared in the late afternoon, and protesters took as a sign from above.

Wonder if Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor had another interpretation of the naturally-occuring sign?

Amazing double rainbow today -- is it a sign?

She coincidentally held her weekly news briefing today and aside from saying that social distancing measures would be further eased by Friday, Lam continued her tirade against those who were vocally against the national security bill.

"I urge the opposition to stop demonizing and stigmatizing [the law], so as not to pit themselves against the people in Hong Kong," she said. "The common goal must be for Hong Kong to maintain stability."

As if people weren't concerned enough, their worries were further heightened when Deng Zhonghua, deputy director of the cabinet-level Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office said Beijing would exercise jurisdiction over cases "in very special circumstances" when applying the new law, that Hongkongers might be extradited to the mainland for trials -- one of their greatest fears about the national security law.

Lam's response to reporters' questions about this was hardly comforting.

"Without any details about the provisions in the legislation, and how they are going to be applied, it is not possible and appropriate for me to express my opinion on comments made by my mainland counterparts, because I'm not a party to the lawmaking institution," she said.

So how can she even begin to reassure the public that the new law will only impact a small group of people when she even admits she doesn't know what is in the provisions of the law. It is completely backwards and the unknown is making people even more anxious.

When 2 million people marched a year ago

Hong Kong legal experts are wondering how this national security law will be compatible with the existing Basic Law and what does "special circumstances" mean?

Meanwhile Civic Party lawmaker Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu accused Lam of applying a double standard in claiming that the opposition camp was "demonizing the new law".

"We challenged the law because it's uncertain and it lacks details," he said. "When all top officials are promoting the bill without details, they fail to show Hongkongers how they are able to safeguard human rights, and it's also unfair and illogical to criticize us.

"Is Carrie Lam demonstrating the new normal? That after the national security law is enacted, all voices from us will be seen as demonizing the government?"

Yes it seems Lam is taking it all very personally and lashing out with the word "demonizing" when lawmakers are just challenging her for more information.

Yeung challenges Lam to guarantee people's rights

It's pathetic, but then again that's what we ended up with, thanks to the election committee of 1,200 people, 777 of who voted for her in 2017.

What would have happened if her challenger John Tsang Chun-wah had won?

What would have happened if Hong Kong already had universal suffrage?

But no, we don't have universal suffrage, we don't have a leader defending Hong Kong's interests and one country, two systems is disintegrating before our eyes.

And she tells us not to worry...

Remembering Raincoat Man

Over one thousand people left floral tributes to Leung tonight

If the Hong Kong government thinks after almost 9,000 arrests in the past year that the number of protesters has shrunk to only a small group of "rioters", then it is sorely mistaken.

This evening over a thousand people came to Pacific Place in Admiralty to remember Marco Leung Ling-kit, who was the first casualty of the extradition protests exactly a year ago, and to mourn the death of "one country, two systems".

They also mourned "one country, two systems"

From around 6pm onwards, mourners came clutching white flowers to place them at the exact spot where Leung, wearing a yellow raincoat, fell to his death while trying to hang a protest banner. And the people kept coming.

And coming.

And coming.

The line stretched all the way westwards along Queensway and around the corner up Cotton Tree Drive where the west entrance to Hong Kong Park is, about 1km. The floral tributes didn't stop until 11pm. Some people waited two hours in line to reach the floral shrine.

A female retiree in her 60s told one media outlet she was arrested last year for taking part in a protest last year.

The police had opposed to march organizer Civil Human Rights Front to hold a public gathering for Leung, and she said, "Whatever the government refuses to let us do, it is the right thing to do."

Most people wore black and a white ribbon, signifying their support for a strike to protest against the upcoming national security bill.

As expected the police were standing by in riot gear ready to attack, but all they did was warn the crowd about social distancing and advised them to disperse.

Inside the mall people sang Glory to Hong Kong

Also in the tributes was a sign that read: "RIP One country, two systems 1997-2020".

Inside Pacific Place protesters shouted slogans and sang the protest anthem Glory to Hong Kong while waving flags.

There were memorials also held in Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai.

The sheer numbers of people show they are still keen to defend Hong Kong's rights and freedoms from the impending national security law. But will the government recognize these people's views? More importantly will Beijing?

If the national security bill is of utmost importance for Hong Kong, how come residents, who will be most impacted by it are not consulted? Why is it being done in such a secretive manner? Why are Hong Kong officials and many businesses blindly supporting it without even knowing what is in this new law?

No one is defending Hong Kong except Hongkongers themselves. A year ago tomorrow, 2 million people came out to march against the extradition bill put forward by Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor.

There are still a lot of people who love this city and feel betrayed by Beijing for reneging on the Joint Declaration, where it was promised there would be 50 years of no change until 2047.

The remembrance ended at 11pm at Pacific Place

So while Lam and her senior ministers may think they are winning the war against the protesters, they are completely underestimating the sheer anger and sadness Hongkongers have, and that these emotions being channeled through every anniversary this year.

Protesters will make sure the Hong Kong government or the world will not forget what happened in the past year.

Beijing Fights to Contain Virus, HK Fights to Contain Protesters

Beijing police prevent people from going to Fengtai district

After 55 consecutive days of no new coronavirus cases, Beijing has had an explosion of new ones in the last few days.

Forty-four new cases were reported on the weekend, most of them apparently linked to Xinfadi Market in Fengtai district and it was immediately shut down. People living near the wet market were tested.

Xinfadi Market where new cases were linked

A wholesale seafood market called Jingsheng was also closed on suspicion of one of the patients who recently tested positive went there.

Ben Cowling, professor and head of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Hong Kong's school of public health believes this is the start of the second wave of coronavirus in Beijing.

Despite the capital city's efforts to prevent a second wave, it has now arrived and medical authorities are trying to find out where it came from. There were reports it was from a piece of imported salmon, but experts dismissed this, saying it could have been the fishmonger or the customer who had the virus.

Looks like Beijing has its hands full trying to contain the coronavirus, though there are probably a lot of people who are asymptomatic and are now testing positive or recently caught it from someone else.

Chan mulling over relaxing distancing measures

In the meantime here in Hong Kong, Secretary for Health and Food Sophia Chan Siu-chee is mulling easing social-distancing regulations as the city has had no new cases today, with the total at 1,109, and four deaths.

The day before it was reported another person tested positive who lives at Luk Chuen House at Lek Yuen Estate in Sha Tin, making them the ninth case in a recent cluster there.

Social distancing restrictions are supposed to end on June 18, but it is possible the government may extend it in a bid to prevent protests, but lots of people are frustrated by how the authorities decide what is open and what remains closed.

For example, why is the tourist attraction Ocean Park allowed to reopen when playgrounds are not? Why are public swimming pools open when saunas and steam rooms cannot? When it comes to tennis, there cannot be players on every tennis court -- they must keep alternate ones free of people, even though the maximum number of players is four per court.

A ninth person who lived here tested positive

So perhaps Chan can focus on addressing these questions that many parents and exercisers are asking?