Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Our youth want a say in their future, not crumbs from tycoons' dinner plates
Albert Cheng says by their words and deeds, Hong Kong's old guard show they haven't really understood the yearning for equality and social justice
Albert Cheng
A flag with the image of an umbrella flies in an occupied area outside the government headquarters in Admiralty. Photo: AP
At 77, former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa is trying to pick up the political pieces the old-fashioned way. He has assembled his allies and former aides to launch a think tank to talk about ways to, among other missions, improve the housing and economic conditions for the young and furious.
Like Tung himself, some of those he has enlisted were either caught in controversies or bowed out in disgrace. The local Chinese press has coined a name for them - used batteries. Tung has also recruited some of the second and third generations of tycoons in town.
However, none of the democratic activists have been invited. This is not surprising; after all, Tung's Our Hong Kong Foundation has been billed by some as a vehicle to promote his former financial secretary Antony Leung Kam-chung as the next chief executive.
Leung, 62, delivered the keynote speech at the launch of the foundation on Sunday. His speech was reminiscent of a campaign manifesto. He sees Occupy Central as a manifestation of three destabilising factors: a generation gap, conflicts between Hong Kong and the mainland, and a widening wealth gap caused by low taxes and high land prices.
He said Occupy had exposed problems in social governance, economic transition and youth development. In his view, the solution lies in improving upward mobility for young people by building more affordable housing for them. Another way is to set up a government fund to supplement initiatives to support young entrepreneurs. These measures would supposedly put the frustrated young people on the track to hope and harmony.
This diagnosis is way off the mark and reflects how out of touch Leung and the other old guards are. Asking the vested business interests to plough back a little portion of their huge profits can hardly make an impact.
Nobody will dispute that the crisis is related to youth issues. Offering them better housing and careers will, of course, help ease the tension. However, the core of the so-called youth problems has transcended the immediate want of social stability and personal prosperity.
Just look at the recent commentary in
The New York Times by Joshua Wong Chi-fung. As he put it: "The people of my generation want more. In a world where ideas and ideals flow freely, we want what everybody else in an advanced society seems to have: a say in our future."
The youngsters' frustration is not confined to a bleak economic outlook for themselves. It is about justice, equality in political right, fair use of social capital, cultural liberation, environmental conservation and possibilities of alternative ways for growth. In the parlance of social psychology, they are after self-actualisation.
The youth-led movement has been labelled the Umbrella Revolution. It is indeed a revolution in many senses. Those in government and Tung's think tank are not even speaking the language of the youth, let alone addressing the real issues.
The old guard have been repeating the theme that our future is intertwined with that of the motherland. Their mentality is, as captured in Tung's often ridiculed refrain: "Good for the country, good for Hong Kong." It wasn't appealing 15 years ago. It is even less so today.
The psychological gap between Hong Kong and the mainland has been widening since reunification in 1997. This is evident in the slogans and motifs used in the protests. Many young people are ready to make financial sacrifices to, for example, drastically cut the number of mainland tourists. One of their worst nightmares is a Hong Kong dominated by mainland interests and downgraded to just another Chinese city.
In fact, most occupiers are not students or less-educated, jobless youngsters. According to a survey by the pro-government
Sing Tao Daily,
about half the protesters in Admiralty are between 21 and 30, but only one-fifth are students. Most have a full-time job. Employers and professionals from the finance sector are among those still at the occupied sites. Occupy is more complicated than a conflict between the haves and the have-nots.
The old dogs have failed to learn any new tricks to tackle the sentiments of discontent. Young people want equal opportunities, not just opportunities on the mainland. To achieve this, we need a complete overhaul of the electoral system to recognise that everyone is born equal, at least politically.
Tung and others have said the students' message was loud and clear. Yet, they have not made any concession to accommodate their demands for change. Our Hong Kong Foundation will not make much of a difference if it does not even accept the students' demand for an equitable electoral system to start with.
Lee Cheuk-yan leads protesters in a march to police headquarters. Photo: Alan Yu
Two Occupy Central marshals arrested after restraining attackers who threw animal organs at Next Media Chairman Jimmy Lai Chee-ying joined about 100 demonstrators on a march to police headquarters this afternoon, to protest against the charges.
Five people were arrested last night after Lai was struck in the face with the organs at Occupy Central in Admiralty.
Three men, speaking in Cantonese with a local accent, swore at the Next Media founder and told him to “drop dead”, witnesses said. They were later arrested over common assault and fighting.
Two marshals at the protest site, Alex Kwok Siu-kit and Ricky Or Yiu-lam, were also arrested. They were not charged and released on bail this morning.
Pro-democracy lawmakers including Lee Cheuk-yan, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung and Emily Lau Wai-hing joined the march, which was organised by the Civil Human Rights Front. The organisers had not requested permission from police, making the march an act of civil disobedience.
Protesters demand that police commisionerAndy Tsang step down. Photo: Alan Yu
Several police officers made an attempt to stop the protesters as they walked down Harcourt Road but they were heavily outnumbered and the march continued towards the force’s headquarters on Arsenal Street in Wan Chai.
The protesters called for Commissioner of Police Andy Tsang Wai-hung to resign.
The marchers echoed statements made by pro-democracy lawmakers at an earlier press conference, who said they were worried about government officials and police management pressuring officers on the ground to serve political ends.
Occupy marshal Or said this could destroy trust in the police.
“For years, we were taught to help the police fight crime. But it turns out helping the police means we’ll start as witnesses and end up as suspects and get charged.”
Protesters ignored police warnings to stop. Photo: Alan Yu
Fellow marshal Kwok, a union leader, stressed that protesters had nothing against officers on the ground.
“We don’t want to oppose police officers on the front line. Our enemy is the Hong Kong government,” Kwok said.
One of Lai’s attackers was the same person who threw eggs at lawmaker Leung recently, the marshals alleged. Leung said Kwok and Or should be rewarded.
“They solved two cases for the police at once. They deserve a medal!” Leung said.
Three Federation of Students representatives will go to Beijing tomorrow to lodge a protest over the central government’s restrictive ruling on political reform.
It comes as Civic Party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit criticised a plan for the Occupy Central co-founders and their supporters to surrender to police next week.
Federation secretary general Alex Chow Yong-kang last night said the trip was a “political protest” after several people had refused to line up talks for them with leaders in Beijing.
Chow, Eason Chung Yiu-wa and Nathan Law Kwun-chung hope to meet Premier Li Keqiang, officials and delegates to the national legislature, which is behind the reform ruling.
“The central government has destroyed ‘one country, two systems’ over the past years,” Chow said. “[The trip] symbolises that Hongkongers are not afraid of Beijing’s manipulation.”
He said they were not sure if they would be allowed entry. The trip would be cancelled if police cleared protest sites in Admiralty and Mong Kok beforehand.
Meanwhile, Leong, who is a barrister, said that if Benny Tai Yiu-ting and his allies carried out their plan, they would be turning their backs on student protesters if they did not return to the sit-ins afterwards.
But if they did go back, their move would become just a “gesture” as they would merely be going through the motions at the police station, Leong said.
Student leaders have said they would rather be arrested than give themselves up. It is believed that Tai, his Occupy co-organisers Dr Chan Kin-man and the Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and their backers are still discussing the idea of going to the police on November 21 or 22. That would fulfil their vow to shoulder legal responsibility for the civil disobedience action that has paralysed the city’s streets.
But Leong had his doubts. “I have difficulty understanding the Occupy trio,” the lawmaker told the Post, when asked if he would join them in surrendering. The senior counsel continued: “If the police really want to arrest any of us, they would first of all have drafted … the charge, and then they will come … and arrest us.
“Turning yourself in at a police station [takes] 10 minutes at most. They will just give you a white card with a report book number on it. Mr Leong, this is your report book number, the number is 1234. You can go away’ … So this is a gesture more than anything else.”
He questioned if it was the right time to surrender, given that many protesters would not leave the sit-ins. “There is no way that, after turning myself in, and while the movement is still going on, I would turn my back on the students [by not returning]. And if you are not doing that, what is the point of turning yourself in on an arbitrary date?”
More importantly was what the move would mean for the future of the democracy campaign. Stressing the need for public support, Leong said it was time to “take stock” of what had been attained so far. “I certainly would not want to see the achievements [lost] as a result of our losing of the sympathy of [Hongkongers].”
Separately, a loyal supporter of Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said Beijing had not narrowed the city’s autonomy as stated in the Basic Law. Rather, it had interpreted Hong Kong’s mini-constitution “way too loosely” in the 17 years since the handover, leading to the protests, Ronnie Chan Chichung said.
“There was a guiding principle in Beijing: the best way to administer Hong Kong is not to touch it at all,” Chan told students at the University of Science and Technology. But this policy had been wrong, he said. “The result? You can see that in Central.”
Chan said he had told Beijing that the governance problem, including Occupy, was rooted in the lack of a sense of nationhood. “The hearts of Hong Kong people are still not [with] China.”
He also criticised the Hong Kong government’s failure to bring in national education in schools. “It’s really ridiculous not having that kind of education.”
Re: China blocks bbc website after video shows hong kong police beating protester
Judge refuses to delay injunction that lets police help clear protesters
Appeal to be heard today on ruling that paves the way for police to help clear Mong Kok sites
Pro-democracy protesters sit on a barricade in Mong Kok. Photo: AP
A High Court judge yesterday refused to delay an injunction that will allow the police to assist bailiffs in clearing Occupy protest areas in Mong Kok and even arrest people who obstruct them.
Two defendants, Dominic Fok Wai-pong and Ng Ting-pong, had filed applications to stay the court order, and also asked for leave to appeal after Mr Justice Au Hing-cheung rejected their application yesterday. The case will be heard in the Court of Appeal this afternoon.
The protesters' legal team argued that the judge's ruling had been in error because he addressed the question of public order by way of civil litigation, but not by the government itself.
They also said the drivers' group that applied for the injunction had failed to show they suffered substantial losses beyond those of the rest of the public.
But Au found those grounds were not arguable and refused to grant them leave to appeal.
A group of Occupy activists who were arrested during a clash with police in Lung Wo Road on October 15 were freed unconditionally yesterday. They had refused to keep making regular visits to a police station to renew their bail. Photo: Sam Tsang
He told the lawyers for the taxi and minibus drivers' group that he would hand down the order of injunction no later than today.
Solicitor Maggie Chan Man-ki, for the minibus drivers, said that once they had the order they would follow all proper procedures, including publishing the terms of the order in newspapers and putting it up at protest areas before taking action.
Barrister Margaret Ng, for the protesters, complained that the court and plaintiffs had failed to inform people in protest areas about the terms of the order since the judge handed down the judgment on Monday.
"The order will affect a lot of people in the area. They have the right to know details of the court order and how it will be carried out. Otherwise, it will be unfair," Ng said.
Occupy protesters in Mong Kok said they had seen unusual police behaviour this week and were preparing to retake areas if they were cleared.
"We will not give up [the occupied streets] unconditionally," said Man Ip, 20, who has been camping in the protest areas.
Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung said police action would be justified. Although court injunctions were civil in nature, Yuen said an open refusal to comply with them constituted a "collateral criminal act in contravention of the rule of law".
Meanwhile, 31 Occupy activists who were arrested during a clash with police in Lung Wo Road on October 15 were freed unconditionally yesterday. They had refused to keep making regular visits to a police station to renew their bail.
Julie Chu, Samuel Chan, Stuart Lau, Ng Kang-chung and Jeffie Lam
Many people have suggested that the administration has failed to provide young people with a positive view of their future. This perspective only reinforces their entitlement mindset. Photo: AFP
As the endgame for Occupy Central looms, now begins Hong Kong's own "reconstruction". Just as the United States was wrecked by its civil war, our city's law and order is in danger of erosion.
The spark that led to the "umbrella movement" is a call for democracy. This can be traced back to the mid-1990s when Hong Kong was awash in wealth and self-confidence.
For 30 years, Asia has enjoyed dizzying levels of economic expansion. Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea, the so-called Asian Tigers, adopted capital market polices to achieve their highest standards of individual and collective wealth ever. Yet even as affluence grew, social unrest brewed. Singapore's recent racial tensions and Taiwan's "sunflower movement" were two examples. Money can't buy love, nor purpose and fulfilment in life.
For thousands of years, Asian communities have lived by core values that dictate all aspects of life: character building, respecting family structures and paternal governance, among others. Social order gave a sense of purpose in life. People were encouraged to work hard.
Soon after the handover, our administration made history and the humanities subjects non-compulsory in schools, considering them subordinate to skills necessary to sustain our economy. Our young now know much more about business management than about the intrigues of dynastic conflicts in feudal China, the collapse of the empire or the rise of modern China.
For youngsters who grew up in the golden 1990s, their parents adopted a relaxed approach to raising them, offering them a degree of freedom hitherto unseen. This demographic is aptly labelled the "Me" generation.
The Me generation commands the world around them. Armed with an attitude of entitlement, they are often bewildered when things happen out of sequence, spoiling their impression of an orderly, subservient ecosystem.
Many people have suggested that the administration has failed to provide young people with a positive view of their future. This perspective only reinforces their entitlement mindset.
In a healthy nation, citizens bear primary responsibility for its survival and development. As John F. Kennedy succinctly summarised, it is our role as citizens to serve our community, first and foremost.
As Occupy begins to draw to a close, three areas need rethinking. First is a need to understand Hong Kong's historical and cultural context. How pragmatic are international and Western standards of governance, lifestyles and morals? It is imperative that we realise that Hong Kong is a unique place in unusual circumstances.
Secondly, we need to change this entitlement mindset. While Hong Kong's socialistic-capitalist system of low taxation and high welfare works, it is worrying that people's expectations have become unrealistic. In the long run, this unhealthy view has to be balanced with alternative forms of "taxation". For example, we could launch a form of national service, not necessarily military conscription but a period of service to earn our citizen's rights and benefits. If properly done, this not only builds character and moral fibre, but also helps to alleviate social welfare pressures.
Thirdly, many of our citizens are sadly caught in a pendulum swing of love and hate for the mainland. Hong Kong, still a dynamo of creativity and resourcefulness, needs to believe in itself. More can be done to build pride in being Hong Kong Chinese, celebrating our heritage and achievements.
Hong Kong has a wonderful reputation as a can-do city, and it's high time we shared this message with our youth.
Michael Wong is a former lecturer at the Polytechnic University, and researches change management and education
The US bill backs protesters' calls for free and fair elections in Hong Kong. Photo: Sam Tsang
US legislators will table a congressional bill to monitor human rights and political development in Hong Kong, describing the city’s freedoms as “under threat” from Beijing.
The Congressional-Executive Commission on China announced the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act on Thursday, arguing that Washington must back calls for genuine universal suffrage in the chief executive election in 2017.
“Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedoms – essential to its relations with the US – are under threat from China,” said Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat and co-chairman of the commission.
“At this critical time, we must strongly support the universal rights of the people of Hong Kong, including free and fair elections in 2017 and beyond.
“Our bipartisan bill would ensure that the United States can continue to monitor Hong Kong while ensuring that its democracy and freedoms remain a cornerstone of US policy.”
Commission co-chairman and Republican congressman Chris Smith added that “the steady erosion of Hong Kong’s autonomy is the concern of freedom-loving people everywhere.”
The commission, which counts cross-party heavyweights like House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Republican senator Marco Rubio among its number, published its annual report last month of the 12th day of ongoing pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong.
US lawmakers Christopher Smith (left) and Sherrod Brown (right) are co-chairmen of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China.
The report called on the city’s government and Beijing to institute universal suffrage in line with the Basic Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a treaty that China signed in the 1990s but has not ratified.
Organisers of the Occupy Central civil disobedience movement, which has paralysed parts of the city since it officially began on September 28, complain that Beijing’s proposed model for the chief executive election – whereby voters choose between no more than three candidates nominated by a pro-Beijing committee – does not meet “international standards”.
The White House previously called for Hongkongers to be given a “genuine choice of candidates representative of the voters’ will.”
The commission’s statement will be embarrassing for US President Barack Obama, who insisted this week that Washington was not playing a role in the protests. Beijing regards any comments on political development in Hong Kong as interfering in its internal affairs.
“As recent events have demonstrated, China remains just as committed as ever to suppressing dissent and preventing democracy in Hong Kong as it is on the mainland,” Rubio said.
“The US should make clear that we stand on the side of the democratic aspirations of the people of Hong Kong and against attempts to suppress their voices. This legislation would provide a much needed update to existing laws regarding the US-Hong Kong relationship and help to ensure that Hong Kong remains truly autonomous from Beijing.”
Barack Obama assured President Xi Jinping that Washington played no role in the protests during a meeting on the sidelines of the Apec summit in Beijing earlier this week. Photo: AP
The new legislation will update the US-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 by renewing annual reporting functions of the act. The last such report was made in March 2000.
China’s foreign ministry reacted angrily when the report was released last month. Spokesman Hong Lei said the US had no right to get involved in Hong Kong affairs.
“The report by this US body distorts the facts and is a deliberate attack on China. We express our extreme dissatisfaction about it,” Hong said at the time.
“We demand that this committee stop this wrong interference in and damaging of Sino-US relations. This body should speak and act cautiously, stop sending the wrong message to Occupy Central and other illegal activities or provide them support.”
Re: China blocks bbc website after video shows hong kong police beating protester
PUBLISHED : Friday, 14 November, 2014, 12:10pm
UPDATED : Saturday, 15 November, 2014, 3:19am
After Occupy, will Hong Kong be better or worse off?
Michael Chugani believes the end of protests will bring a more polarised society and tighter control by Beijing. So, has it been worth it?
In this new landscape in Hong Kong, the rule of law will no longer be an untouchable core value. And there will be diminished public respect for the police. Photo: AFP
When the tents, barricades and protesters in the occupied zones are finally gone, will we say to ourselves it was all worth it, that we're better off than we were before Occupy Central? What kind of Hong Kong will await us? How will we be changed by the extraordinary events?
Some talk of a lost generation - radicalised youth who will go through life harbouring angry memories of police tear gas, an unresponsive government and authoritarian state leaders who blocked their dream of democracy. Will this radicalised youth continue to challenge the central government when its generation produces our future lawyers, doctors, business leaders and government officials?
How will Beijing view this radicalised generation as Hong Kong and the mainland move unavoidably closer together? How can it manage closer integration when a growing number of young people now identify themselves more as Hongkongers than Chinese? Will state leaders downgrade Hong Kong as an unreliable part of the engine that propels the nation to superpower status?
I don't buy the fear of a lost generation. It is normal for young people in open societies to be radicalised. Being radicalised when young doesn't mean you stay that way forever. The radicalised 1960s generation in the US went on to produce capitalists, conservative business leaders, politicians and even a president. Student leader Li Lu from the 1989 Tiananmen uprising is now a US investment banker.
My worry is not a lost generation but Beijing tightening rather than loosening its political grip on Hong Kong as a result of Occupy. It sees the civil disobedience protest as an audaciously direct challenge to its authority with outside help, something it won't tolerate. That came across loud and clear in President Xi Jinping's stern public warning to US President Barack Obama not to meddle in Occupy.
We wanted state leaders to trust us with democracy. I fear they now trust us even less. In our fight for more democracy, I fear we'll probably end up with less. How will that square with a Hong Kong after Occupy that is drunk with democracy fervour fuelled by the civil disobedience movement? How will the radicalised youth - whose democracy demands amounted to virtual self-rule - react to Beijing's tightened political grip?
What awaits us will be a bitterly polarised Hong Kong with a landscape that many won't recognise. In this new landscape, the rule of law will no longer be an untouchable core value but something that can be disobeyed for a higher principle, as Democratic Party legislator Albert Ho Chun-yan put it. The Legislative Council will no longer serve the people but become a circus of non-cooperation between opposing sides. The Leung Chun-ying administration will no longer be able to function. And there will be diminished public respect for the police.
Will we be better or worse off after Occupy, after factoring in heightened political awareness, societal polarisation, radicalised youth, Beijing's wrath, the impotence of our government and a dysfunctional Legco? I'll leave you to ponder that.
Police keep watch next to a barricade at the Mong Kok protest camp on Friday. Photo: Kyodo
The Court of Appeal will decide today whether Mong Kok occupiers have grounds for appeal against an injunction ordering clearance of their protest site, which allows police to help bailiffs enforce the order.
The judges said they needed time to consider the arguments of the protesters - who say they fear the order could lead to widespread arrests - and would stay the injunction if they found grounds for appeal.
Court vice-president Mr Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon said the judgment on November 10 restrained police from arresting or removing people not actively interfering with the bailiffs.
He was responding to Gladys Li SC, for protester Dominic Fok Wai-pong, who said she was afraid that if the action took place, many people would be arrested or put at risk.
"It is a case with a special and unique nature, as the obstructions are not just physical objects but people," Li said.
Lam said the order - obtained by taxi and minibus drivers who claim their businesses are being affected - only authorised the bailiff to clear the objects "but not the people".
Fok said he had received the order but that the word "obstructions" confused him. "I lived in Mong Kok for many years. It is always crowded. People are forced to walk on the road sometimes. Would the court rule that as a kind of obstruction?"
He said the appeal court's decision would show whether the protest, which concerned the future development of Hong Kong, would be decided by "money matters".
The drivers alleged that the protest had caused a "public nuisance". But the protesters' lawyer argued an individual party could only use "public nuisance" to make a claim when the party could show they suffered substantial loss from the nuisance.
The lawyer claimed the drivers had failed to show they suffered more than the rest of the public, and urged the appeal court to allow protesters to appeal against the ruling handed down on November 10 by Mr Justice Au Hing-cheung.
Lawyers for the taxi drivers said they would not seek to enforce their order until confusion - pointed out yesterday by Lam - over which parts of Nathan Road, Mong Kok were included had been cleared up.
But minibus drivers said their order, obtained yesterday, was valid and they would proceed soon.
Lam and High Court Chief Judge Mr Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung will hand down the judgment today.
Hong Kong needs a political solution, not a legal one, to Occupy protests
Stephanie Cheung says clearing the streets of protesters will only result in a hollow victory for the government. Rather, it should bridge the social divide by responding fully to the concerns raised
In the six weeks of protest, only one formal meeting has taken place between government officials and the protesters.
President Xi Jinping has made it clear that the buck stops with the chief executive for bringing the "umbrella movement" to a close. Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor has made it clear that there is to be no further room for negotiation with the students, while Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying has acknowledged that the Occupy protest is the biggest social movement Hong Kong has faced in its history.
With US President Barack Obama stating unequivocally that the US had no involvement in fostering the movement, blaming it on foreign instigation is no longer tenable. The government should at last face the fact that the movement is a social/political issue requiring a social/political solution, instead of pretending it is a law-and-order issue to be solved by the police, or a rule-of-law issue to be solved by the law courts.
The government has been playing the protest out like a court case, as it reckons that, on the one hand, by dragging it out, the movement will fizzle out naturally as support diminishes, while on the other, it always has the option of forcible eviction by the police. Either way, the government wins - or so it would seem.
However, a far-sighted government would realise that such an approach will lead to a pyrrhic victory.
In the 40-odd days of protests, only one formal meeting has taken place between government officials and the protesters, and that was at the request of the Federation of Students. The students have come up with lists of different demands, whereas the government declines negotiation. This is most frustrating, not only to the protesters, but also to the public, who have to suffer the consequences of this deadlock.
We need not take too literally the protesters' demands for a reversal of the electoral framework of August 31, and open nominations. Instead, we can be unified behind their cry for a more just society, where political power is better shared. We need to keep these youth engaged and motivated instead of alienating them and killing off their enthusiasm.
One 15-year-old student described her ordeal when the police used tear gas on protesters. The fear and pain she went through, she said, was nothing compared to the pain in her heart. She was shocked and indignant that rulers would use violence against citizens expressing an opinion out of love for Hong Kong.
That kind of trauma is in the collective memory of the protesters. Even after the protests are quashed and the streets cleared, unless the government wins back the hearts of its youth, there will be wide-scale disaffection, and distrust and disrespect for the authorities.
As things stand, the government is unlikely to muster the two-thirds majority support needed in the Legislative Council to pass its electoral reform proposal. Even if the protests end, reforms will still not get off the ground.
The government will encounter more and more difficulties in pushing through policies (even for non-political issues). The pan-democratic camp has pledged non-cooperation until the demand for civic nomination of the chief executive is resolved, while the occupiers have the ability to gather in great numbers at short notice to protest.
Unless the government uses this opportunity to reach out, in the long run, Hong Kong will become ungovernable.
It is still not too late for our government to listen and build a bridge across the political divide to forge a consensus. The public should be invited to express their opinions through a formal consultation, with a view to reaching a broad consensus in the community.
Lam has already offered the students a two-pronged process to deal with the issue of nomination of the chief executive: one, by making a report to the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office; and, two, by setting up a multiparty platform for further discussions.
All it requires is for the government to go one step further, to upgrade the report and discussion platform to a formal consultation resulting in a supplementary report to the National People's Congress. This should satisfy the demand of the protesters for the original report to be changed.
The government should also consider an amnesty arrangement, to grant a general pardon for protesters who leave the Occupy sites by an agreed deadline. After that, obstruction in public places could be prosecuted without impunity. This will avoid the scenario of the police being swamped by thousands of protesters turning themselves in, and each making long political speeches in court.
An amnesty would secure peace of mind for the protesters. It would also deter further protests, as those who persist in occupying the streets after the deadline would be unlikely to gain public sympathy. In that way, order may be restored with the least resentment, and without resorting to force by the police.
The issue of an amnesty has to be broached sensitively, as the Occupy Central participants have committed from the start to surrender themselves to the police. Neither did the students ask for amnesty. Without sensitive handling, such an offer of an amnesty or the imposing of a non-consensual deadline will probably be seen as an insult, motivating resistance and martyrdom.
The extent and duration of the protest proves that the government has been out of sync with the younger generations. The administration should heed this wake-up call by creating a channel for our youth to voice their opinion, and tapping their talents.
The supplementary consultation may also invite suggestions on ways to heal the community now torn by extreme polarisation. Hong Kong has always thrived on the diversity of its people. Diversity in opinion is nothing to be feared. If we remain level-headed, respectful and caring of one another, we can resolve the conflict. It is within the government's power to usher all parties onto a constructive path of building and healing.
Stephanie Cheung participated in the student movements in the 1970s, and is currently a solicitor and mediator, and volunteer in youth work and education
Occupy student leaders' Beijing trip on track - without Rita Fan's help
Trio of protesters will probably be rejected at the door before they get to meet any state leader
Rita Fan accused the protesting students of deliberate violation of the law and disruption to life in the city. Photo: Sam Tsang
Student leaders of the Occupy Central movement will take their democracy demands to the capital this afternoon, even though they failed to get help from Hong Kong's sole representative in the top legislature, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, to set up talks with state leaders.
But the trio are likely to be given the cold shoulder. A source close to Occupy organisers cited a middleman who had once facilitated dialogue with the government as saying Beijing would not let them enter the capital.
It is understood that the central government will repatriate Federation of Students representatives Alex Chow Yong-kang, Eason Chung Yiu-wa and Nathan Law Kwun-chung right away rather than detain them.
That would dash their hopes of meeting Premier Li Keqiang , officials and delegates to the National People's Congress to lodge a "political protest" against its restrictive framework for the 2017 chief executive poll.
Last night, Fan, a member of the NPC Standing Committee, accused the protesting students of deliberate violation of the law and disruption to life in the city.
"If I helped you arrange a meeting with central government officials, how could I face the Hongkongers who have been abiding by the law and hoping for a return to normality?" she asked. "I sincerely hope all of you will mend your ways and become pillars of … society. Don't waste your time [occupying] streets!"
Fan reiterated she would not accept students' demand for the Standing Committee to retract its August 31 decision that ruled out public nomination of candidates for the poll and required hopefuls to get majority support from a nominating committee.
But Chow said they would still go to Beijing, despite Fan's remarks. "Fan said the [Standing Committee] framework was reasonable … I wondered if she was blind to what's been happening with the 'umbrella movement'."
He believed it was unlikely they would be arrested by mainland authorities. He said they planned to take a banner with the slogan "I want genuine universal suffrage", and their accommodation in Beijing had been booked.
However, politicians - including a former student leader who staged a protest in Guangzhou years ago - were pessimistic about the Beijing mission.
Democratic Party vice-chairman Richard Tsoi Yiu-cheong was among seven federation representatives who were warmly received in 1988 by Lu Ping , deputy secretary general of the Basic Law drafting committee. He said the political climate had changed since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. "Unless it's arranged in advance, Beijing will see [this] as confrontation."
Executive councillor Bernard Chan urged the trio to stay in Hong Kong and end the occupation instead. "Their messages have been loud and clear in Hong Kong and even on the mainland."
But there is some hope. Three federation representatives were received by officials of the Standing Committee's complaint letter and request handling office when they petitioned against Beijing's Basic Law interpretation in 1999.
Protesters hold lights and banner saying "I want universal suffrage" in Admiralty during Occupy Central movement. Photo: Felix Wong
US legislators tabled a bipartisan bill to Congress on Thursday to monitor "democracy and freedom" in Hong Kong.
The bill described the city's liberty as "under threat" from Beijing following its tight restrictions imposed for the 2017 chief executive election.
On Wednesday in Beijing, US President Barack Obama said "unequivocally" that the US was not involved in fostering the protest movement. The bill could fuel tensions between China and the US just after Obama and President Xi Jinping met on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders' summit this week.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in a written reply yesterday that "Hong Kong affairs are purely China's internal affairs. We are resolutely opposed to any external forces using any method to interfere."
The US Congressional-Executive Commission on China - which counts heavyweights like House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Republican senator Marco Rubio among its number - announced the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act and argued that Washington must back calls for genuine universal suffrage in the city.
The legislation would update the US-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 to "reinstate and strengthen" annual reporting functions. The last report on the city was made by the State Department to Congress in March 2000.
"Hong Kong's autonomy and freedoms - essential to its relations with the US - are under threat from China," said Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat and co-chairman of the commission.
The 1992 act was meant to allow the US government to continue to treat Hong Kong separately from China on economic matters after the 1997 handover.
Last month, the central government reacted angrily to a report by the commission calling on the Beijing and Hong Kong governments to institute universal suffrage in line with the Basic Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a treaty that China signed in the 1990s but has not ratified.
Simon Shen Xuhui, a social scientist at Chinese University, said the bill differed from the committee's report, which just called for universal suffrage according to the Basic Law.
"It probably links more to domestic politics as it's an area that can get bipartisan support after the Congress elections," he said.
Wang Dong, an associate professor of international studies at Peking University, said: "The Democrats lost the midterm elections, and there are always some politicians trying to oppose anything Obama has done. They do so without considering the big picture of Sino-US relations."
Meanwhile, the commission announced a Senate hearing next Thursday on "The Future of Democracy in Hong Kong".
People walk past a cardboard cutout of Chinese President Xi Jinping holding an umbrella as it stands among tents outside the Central Government Offices in Admiralty.
While many in Hong Kong consider the chief executive election proposals from Beijing to be unacceptable and demands for genuine democracy are ongoing, there is no clear definition of what is meant by genuine or of the day-to-day benefits that we might enjoy when it is obtained.
The demands of the Occupy protesters appear to lack focus. Some are specific issues relating to the nomination of chief executive candidates while others are about more general livelihood issues which the previous administration sadly neglected.
Protesters seem to be channelling the frustration of many who feel isolated from and ignored by the government (political appointees and senior officials) and by big business, which is perceived to be greedy and uncaring.
The Basic Law, while less than ideal, exists, and it appears there is very little, if anything, that the Hong Kong government can do to amend it. Surely then, it is now essential to focus on what is possible.
We need to agree on an improved, and if possible enlarged, composition of the nomination committee so that it reflects the community balance of today, not 30 years ago.
The Basic Law states that a fully directly elected Legco is the ultimate objective, so functional constituencies will eventually disappear. If this is not possible yet, we at least need to ensure that members of the nomination committee are elected (not selected) by individuals, not companies.
There is room to do this, even within the rather restrictive framework.
We need to agree on a practical and transparent mechanism whereby committee members can officially be made aware of interested chief executive candidates and to decide on the minimum number of members that need to confirm their support before a particular name is included on the nomination list to secure the required 50 per cent of votes.
We also need to ensure the system does not make it difficult for three candidates rather than two to be nominated, and secure official assurance that further improvements of the overall election system will be considered.
Such decisions, I believe, can be made by Hong Kong people in Hong Kong but will require all parties to work together - in fact, to practise democracy.
However, even if this can be achieved, it is only a start - we also need a marked change in mindset to resolve the livelihood issues which have been ignored for too long.
Thomas Kwok, arriving at the High Court in Admiralty earlier this month. Photo: Dickson Lee
The Occupy Central movement has affected Ritz-Carlton and Sun Hung Kai Properties’ other hotel businesses by up to 10 per cent – but long-term real estate market prospects in Hong Kong are turning stable and healthy, said Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong at an AGM on Saturday.
Thomas Kwok and brother Raymond Kwok Ping-luen, both chairmen and managing directors of Hong Kong’s second largest property group, attended the meeting as the trial for their alleged bribery of former chief secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan continues into a fourth month.
Thomas Kwok, who declined to answer questions unrelated to their property business, said the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect scheme, due to start next Monday, is “a very good start”.
“The through train is an important first step in the central authority’s full opening up of capital account and renminbi business. To choose to do this in Hong Kong means a lot. It shows Hong Kong and Shanghai will be financial centres with different roles, and that will bring benefits to Hong Kong in the long run,” he said.
He said the Occupy movement has affected retail, transportation and hotel businesses the most and dragged down the fourth quarter economy growth forecast, but said it will not affect the group’s investment plans.
Thomas Kwok said the group expected the property market “to be very healthy and stable” next year. The average price of available units in the upcoming four years will stay around HK$16,000 per square foot, he said, adding that recent demand had mostly come from homebuyers or investors for individual use.
“Sale of first-hand units, especially mid-to-small sized ones, are good and speculation has declined, so we expect the market to be stable as a whole unless there will be unexpected circumstances,” he said.
“Our investment in China and in Hong Kong will not slow down because of short-term factors because we make investment plans based on a timeframe of five to seven years.”
Advanced bookings for November and December at hotels held by the group are “noticeably worse” than last year, with Ritz-Carlton in West Kowloon having lost business by 10 per cent since the Occupy movement started, he said.
Sun Hung Kai “has not held annual general meetings on a Saturday in recent years” but a spokesman said there was no special reason to do so this year other than owing to the available schedule of its board members.
More than a dozen people from five organisations led by the lobby group CSSA Alliance protested outside the Sun Hung Kai building before the meeting started, demanding higher taxes to be levied against tycoons in order to alleviate widening rich-and-poor gap.
Lam said any cross-border trip would have to be in compliance with immigration policies in Hong Kong and on the mainland. Photo: Nora Tam
There is no need for student leaders of the Occupy Central movement to take their democracy demands to Beijing on Saturday, according to Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor.
The central government is well aware of the different opinion of Hongkongers and has made decisions accordingly, Lam said on Saturday morning.
The Federation of Students representatives were planning to go to the capital in an attempt to meet state leaders to express their demands for genuine universal suffrage. However, Lam said the demand had already been reflected in a report submitted to Beijing by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying.
“The report pointed out with faith that there are different opinions about the nomination process of the chief executive. That included civil nomination proposed by the Federation of Students,” she said.
The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress made its decision about Hong Kong’s 2017 chief executive election on August 31 after a comprehensive review, Lam said.
“If the Federation of Students is going to express such views, it seems [their trip] isn’t a big necessity,” she added.
While the student leaders were not sure if they would be allowed entry into the mainland, Lam refused to speculate, saying any cross-border trip would have to be in compliance with immigration policies in Hong Kong and on the mainland.
Federation secretary general Alex Chow Yong-kang had said the trip was a “political protest” after several people, including Hong Kong’s sole representative in the top legislature, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, had refused to line-up talks for them with leaders in Beijing.
Chow, Eason Chung Yiu-wa and Nathan Law Kwun-chung hoped to meet Premier Li Keqiang, and officials and delegates to the national legislature, which is behind the reform ruling.
Civic Party lawmaker Alan Leong Kah-kit said the worst scenario would be seeing the students detained after being admitted into the mainland. However, the students were most likely to be refused boarding passes at the airport, he said.
The state-run newspaper Global Times voiced support for the authorities to refuse entry to the students in an editorial on Saturday.
“The HKFS activists are clear that their plan is just a show. They know they might not be able to enter Beijing, or if they do enter, they are unlikely to meet the state leaders,” it wrote.
“But they continue the show just to create an atmosphere of martyrdom. If the three activists were arrested by authorities in Beijing, it could be a successful climax to the show – there might be a sympathetic outpour in Hong Kong if that would happen.”
Occupy student leaders seeking to travel to Beijing denied boarding at airport
Cathay Pacific spokesman tells the Federation of Students' Alex Chow, Eason Chung and Nathan Law their immigration documents have been revoked
Student leaders Alex Chow Yong-kang (centre), Nathan Law Kwun-chung (left) and Eason Chung Yiu-wa at Hong Kong international airport on Saturday afternoon before they were denied boarding on a scheduled Cathay Pacific flight to Beijing. Photo: AFP
Three pro-democracy student leaders attempting to visit Beijing were turned away at Hong Kong airport on Saturday, as airline staff said their immigration documents had been revoked by mainland authorities.
Alex Chow Yong-kang, Eason Chung Yiu-wa and Nathan Law Kwun-chung, all from the Federation of Students, looked shocked when they heard the announcement from a Cathay Pacific staff member, who said the airline was “notified this morning” about the revocation of their home-return permits.
The government in Beijing has yet to offer any explanation for the abrupt change of their immigration status. Lester Shum, the group’s deputy leader, said it would hold a press conference in the evening.
The trio made no comment to dozens of reporters at Chek Lap Kok airport covering what would otherwise have been a historic trip, with Hong Kong’s democracy supporters pressing for direct political dialogue with central government officials in the capital.
The students arrived at the airport at 3.30pm, and were greeted by about 100 supporters holding yellow umbrellas in the departure hall. About a dozen anti-Occupy protesters were also present.
Supporters of Federation of Students representatives hold yellow umbrellas inside Hong Kong International Airport on Saturday. Photo: EPA
At about 3.50pm, the three student leaders were escorted by police into the immigration area through the staff entrance.
But before their baggage was scanned, they were stopped by several police officers and other people in uniforms, who took them aside and questioned them for almost half an hour. They were then taken out of the immigration area through the staff exit.
Before they entered the immigration area, Chow, secretary-general of the federation, said he could not accept the possibility of being denied entry. “We have exhausted all the channels to try to communicate with the government officials. The visit is the only way we could resort to.”
Speaking at the press conference later on Saturday evening, the students said they were “shocked” about the revocation of their return-home permits.
“Why is a great state like China afraid of just three students? This is unimaginable,” said Chow.
“The symbolic meaning of today is that they have revoked not just our permits, but also the rights of the whole generation. It means the government is no longer willing to listen to the voice of this generation of people in Hong Kong.”
Chow said he would write to the Hong Kong government to demand an explanation, because so far it was only the airline company that had informed them their documents were invalid.
The federation would not plan another trip to mainland in near future, he said, but it would be working in different neighbourhoods to continue to spread ideas about universal suffrage.
Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee attends a meeting at Legco building in Tamar in this file image from last month. Photo: May Tse
Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee, a lawmaker and former security secretary, said it was “entirely discretionary” for mainland authorities to revoke entry documents belonging to visitors who were “not bona fide”.
“The students are just staging a show. Their attitude is poor,” Ip said. She noted that President Xi Jinping was not in Beijing, nor did the students make an appointment with state leaders, asking: “Did the students really treat their country as their home? It’s a home-return permit.”
She said the trio’s case could be compared with that of Edward Snowden, as the UK government told worldwide carriers not to take the man whom the US government alleged to be a leaker of state secrets there.
“Any immigration authority has the right to do so [to] suspected terrorists, criminals or troublemakers,” Ip said.
Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!
Beijing bans student leaders from taking trip to mainland to press for democracy
Federation representatives demand to know why their travel documents were invalidated even before they boarded flight to the capital
Nathan Law, Alex Chow and Eason Chung at Hong Kong airport after being banned from flying. Photo: Jonathan Wong
Three student leaders at the heart of the Occupy Central protests are demanding the Hong Kong government explain why their travel documents were invalidated yesterday, hours before they were to fly to Beijing to press their demands for true universal suffrage.
It is extremely rare for authorities to revoke a Hongkonger's "home return permit" before they even reach the mainland. Local pro-democracy activists have in the past either had their entry denied without their travel permits affected, had their applications for renewal of the permits rejected, or had their permits confiscated on mainland soil.
The students and pan-democratic lawmakers said the decision was an "affront to the law" and a sign that Beijing would not listen to Hong Kong people's views.
This came as US President Barack Obama gave his strongest statement yet on the Occupy movement, saying that Hongkongers were demanding a universal, not Western, value.
The students said they were "shocked and angry" to discover that their travel documents had been invalidated. "Why is a great state like China afraid of just three students?" federation secretary general Alex Chow Yong-kang said. "We have not even stepped on mainland soil."
It is the first time Federation of Students representatives have had their entry permits terminated; three times in the past 26 years, delegations have been allowed to visit over sensitive issues.
Chow said he would demand an explanation from the Hong Kong government because it was only Cathay Pacific, the airline they were booked on, that told them their permits were revoked.
The Security Bureau did not comment. An Immigration Department spokeswoman said the Airport Authority was responsible for the area where the three were turned back. The authority said it did not have the power to turn back the students.
The students wanted to go to Beijing to seek meetings with state leaders including Premier Li Keqiang to express a demand for genuine universal suffrage for the 2017 chief executive election. They had three banners bearing slogans with Occupy protesters' signatures.
Supporters of Federation of Students representatives hold yellow umbrellas inside Hong Kong International Airport on Saturday. Photo: EPA
At about 3.50pm yesterday, Chow and federation members Nathan Law Kwun-chung and Eason Chung Yiu-wa were escorted by airport staff through a crew entrance to have their baggage scanned and documents checked. They were told that they should use the crew entrance because the departure hall was packed with their supporters.
But once inside, they were stopped by several police officers and Airport Authority staff and taken aside. After almost 30 minutes of questioning and waiting, Chow said they were told that they had to go back. A Cathay staff member told the students that the airline was "informed by relevant parties this morning" that their home return permits had been made void.
Former federation member Jeffrey Tsang, who planned to take the same flight to help the trio with accommodation and transport, was also informed by Cathay that his travel permit had been invalidated.
The decision was "an affront to the rule of law" and "arbitrary use of power", said Alan Leong Kah-kit, convenor of a weekly meeting of 23 pan-democratic lawmakers. He said he saw no point in the Hong Kong government starting the next round of public consultation on political reform as Beijing had stopped listening to the people.
But Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee, a lawmaker and former security minister, said mainland authorities had the right to revoke the travel documents of suspected terrorists, criminals or troublemakers.
"The students are just staging a show. Their attitude is poor," Ip said. She said the trio's case could be compared to that of whistle-blower Edward Snowden, as the British government told airlines around the world not to allow him on board flights to the UK after the US government alleged he had leaked state secrets.
Ip's comment echoed that of the Global Times, a state-run tabloid, which said in an editorial yesterday that the students' plan was "a show just to create an atmosphere of martyrdom".
Meanwhile, Obama had words of support for the protesters who have occupied sites in Admiralty, Mong Kok and Causeway Bay for seven weeks. "Today, people in Hong Kong are speaking out for their universal rights," Obama said in a speech in Australia, where he was attending the G20 summit.
"When we speak out on these issues, we're told that democracy is just a Western value; I fundamentally disagree with that."
In response, the Chief Executive's Office reiterated that the government hoped foreign governments and legislatures would "respect" the principle that constitutional development was an "internal affair" of Hong Kong.
Meanwhile, Markus Ederer, state secretary of Germany's Federal Foreign Office, told a law conference at the Chinese University of Hong Kong that people should "recognise and accept the legal and political limits", respect the rule of law and make compromises on political reform.
He said he had met local officials and Beijing's representatives on Friday.
Philip Bowring says both officials and demonstrators ought to review not just what went wrong, or right, for them, but also what the movement tells us about Hong Kong's ills
The issue now is not just how many protesters will be arrested, but more important is whether the government and our business and bureaucratic elite have learned any lessons about the links between economic discontent and political representation. Photo: AP
As I write, it's not over yet, but there are many lessons to be learned from the Occupy protests. The most important for the main protagonists is that no amount of passion and successful tactics can substitute for lack of strategy. It was said of the 19th-century anarchist Mikhail Bakunin that he was essential for the first days of a revolution - and should then be shot. Real revolutions needed Leninist "science", not the romanticism of the anarchists.
Thus Hong Kong's peaceful umbrella "revolution" had its inspirational Joshua Wong Chi-fung, and the determination of the students encouraged tens of thousands more to join the protest movement. But it lacked one vital ingredient - an exit strategy.
Given that there was no way its declared aims could be realised other than in the much longer term, the movement needed to maximise its propaganda impact in Hong Kong and overseas. Its longevity has been impressive, but returns have been gradually diminishing as public boredom and some frustration set in. Best to have ended the protests much earlier but with a promise to return, or sustain them in a different way. Concern not to lose face by ending the demonstrations before a concrete result could be shown has proven damaging.
On the government side, concern not to lose face by making any overt concessions was equally obvious. But this seems to have proved quite a successful strategy. After a series of serious tactical errors - the tear gas, Leung Chun-ying's speech, and so on - sitting tight, avoiding confrontation but yielding nothing proved the correct response.
And if the police were to be used to clear the streets, it would be the result of private-sector initiatives sanctioned by the courts. Thus, demonstrators were confronted by a very real choice: remove themselves from the roads or submit peacefully to being arrested.
Given that the Hong Kong government has been in such disarray, with no leadership from Leung, the strategy seems to have emanated from the central government's liaison office. This was a little local difficulty which must be resolved without mayhem but without concessions. If that took time, so be it. Time was on the side of the government.
But the Beijing and government claim that the demonstrations are a threat to the rule of law was nonsense of the sort to be expected in a one-party state where the party makes and interprets the law. Civil disobedience has a long and honourable history in states ruled by law. By definition, it accepts the legal system. The protesters are not attempting to overthrow the system but draw attention to unjust laws or discrimination in voting, whether that involved women in Britain in the early 20th century, blacks in the United States or, now, the poorer classes in Hong Kong. Individuals suffer through fines and jail terms in the cause of righting legal and social wrongs.
The issues now will not just be how many protesters end up actually being arrested - turning themselves in to the police is a silly and soft option. But more important is whether the government itself and its core in the business and bureaucratic elite have learned any lessons about the links between economic discontent and political representation. Although there are some signs that the broader business community appreciates that frustrations run deep, the elite still seems to be about as obdurate and greedy as its counterpart in Thailand.
A small classic example of the bureaucratic elite's failure to learn was the recent report recommending a pay increase for top civil servants but not the rest. It should be no surprise that the panel recommending this was headed by a former senior civil servant who went on to an even more prosperous career with property developers and sits on various other government-appointed committees.
Although these senior bureaucrats enjoy perks and job security unknown in the private sector - yet do not face significant scrutiny by those outside their group despite constant mismanagement of major projects - they somehow seem to expect to be paid as much as, and enjoy a lifestyle similar to that of top private-sector executives. The idea of public service seems to have been eroded in the quest to own more houses or horses.
The same attitudes prevail in police failure to prosecute illegal limousine parking and government reluctance to enforce land and related laws in the New Territories. These failures are not the result of laziness on the part of ordinary police officers or middle-ranking civil servants. They are the direct result of decisions made by the senior ranks for reasons which they are not asked to explain - not even by the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
So perhaps another result of the "restoration of law and order" on the streets of Admiralty and Mong Kok will be a focus on unequal treatment of the majority in Hong Kong as well as the vast inequality of income. An independent judiciary is of limited use if the application of laws is unequal. So, let us all look for fairer government and the rule of law.
Universal suffrage is no cure-all but something needed to be done to try to shake this government out of lethargy and protection of vested interests. It may not have succeeded. If so, the long-term cost to society will be huge.
Philip Bowring is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator
The Court of Appeal has refused to hear a protester's appeal against an injunction which allows police to assist bailiffs in clearing the Mong Kok protest site and arrest people who obstruct them.
High Court Chief Judge Andrew Cheung Kui-nung and Court of Appeal vice-president Mr Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon also refused Dominic Fok Wai-pong's request to stay the injunction granted by Mr Justice Thomas Au Hing-cheung on November 10.
Solicitor Maggie Chan Man-ki, representing the minibus drivers' group which was granted the injunction, said they would not take action immediately, as she needed to talk with them before placing newspaper ads to inform protesters, as required by the order.
"It all depends on the placing of the ads and the professional advice from the bailiff and the police," Chan said.
She also claimed the order included not just physical objects but also people obstructing drivers from using Nathan Road between Argyle Street and Dundas Street.
"There is a chance that if [any protester] obstructs and prevents my clients from using the road, [he or she will breach the court order]," she said.
It may take a few more days before another injunction granted to a taxi drivers' group is enforced as the wording of the order needs to be amended.
Dominic Fok Wai-pong appealed against an injunction which allows police to assist bailiffs in clearing the Mong Kok protest site and arrest people who obstruct them.
Fok said he was very disappointed by the decision, as he believed the court failed to clarify whether a public order could be dealt with by civil litigation.
"If a group of people applied for a march in the main roads of the city and obtained the approval of the police, but another group complained the march would affect their livelihoods, will the court grant an injunction to stop the march?" Fok asked.
He said he did not have much chance of taking his case further, but he would remain at the protest site and would not obstruct the bailiffs' work.
Fok's lawyer had argued that the two drivers' groups had failed to show they had suffered substantial damage in seeking the injunction. The two appeal court judges found the lower court was correct in ruling that the blocking of the road would cause professional drivers to suffer.
"Indeed for those who earn a living or derive an income from the provision of public transport services in Hong Kong, a densely populated city with heavy traffic and serious road congestion even in normal times, their loss in earnings or income by reason of the road blockages in an area as busy and as central as Mong Kok is, in our view, almost a matter of common sense, quite apart from the evidence submitted [by the defence side]," their judgment said.
They also found that Fok, and by extension other protesters, had no right to occupy and block the roads. They reaffirmed that "everyone should obey a court order". The two judges agreed with the original decision authorising police to assist bailiffs in carrying out the court order.
Police Commissioner Andy Tsang Wai-hung yesterday called on protesters not to obstruct the enforcement of injunctions aimed at clearing occupied zones in Mong Kok and Admiralty.
"[The protests] cannot be allowed to go on," said Tsang. "These protests have blockaded roads, severely disrupted the order of society and undermined the rule of law in Hong Kong."
