#OccupyCentral thread: Give me Liberty or Give me Death!

[ControlFreak]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


How Hong Kong can best counter pernicious external influences

Regina Ip says that, to fight harmful external ideas, the best option for the government is to resell the benefits of the Basic Law and 'one country, two systems' to the people

PUBLISHED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 6:03am
UPDATED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 6:03am

Regina Ip

There is strong evidence that Hong Kong's "umbrella movement" owes much to Taiwan's student-led "sunflower" movement. Photo: Reuters

Ever since Occupy Central erupted, a familiar refrain in media reports on the mainland has been the involvement of "external forces". During the recent Apec leaders' meeting in Beijing, US President Barack Obama denied any US involvement in fostering the protest. Yet Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying has said he would produce evidence of external involvement at an appropriate time.

Who's telling the truth? Both were probably telling the truth as they knew it. Yet, whatever the facts at their fingertips, it would be hard to pin down "external involvement" in Hong Kong's Occupy protest as criminal activities that could be proscribed under existing Hong Kong laws.

When mainland media, and occasionally mainland officials, talked about "external forces", the words they used - waibu shili - should more accurately be translated as "external influence". If "external influence" is identified as the chief driving force behind the protest, there is more than a germ of truth in that. The idea of "civil disobedience" - the subject of an essay by Henry Thoreau in the mid-19th century - came from the West. The idea of Occupy came from the US - it started with the Occupy Wall Street protest of 2011. The idea of civic nomination also came from the US. Taiwan's electoral system, much admired by local, pro-democracy academics as more democratic than that of Hong Kong, permits "public" nomination of a presidential candidate. The provenance of the "public nomination" system in Taiwan is probably the US, given the pervasive US influence on the island.

There is strong evidence that Hong Kong's "umbrella movement" - the colour symbolism, the wording of the slogans and the mode of mobilisation - owes much to Taiwan's student-led "sunflower" movement. The repeated attempts by students and rioters to occupy government headquarters and more recently the Legislative Council may well have been inspired by the "sunflower" movement's occupation of the Legislative Yuan earlier this year. At least one pro-Taiwan independence scholar has turned up at Hong Kong's occupied areas to speak to protesters. In the past year, Hong Kong academics and legislators heavily involved in the Occupy protest have travelled to Taiwan to learn from the "sunflower" movement. Several leaders of Taiwan's movement are also known to have visited Hong Kong soon after Occupy broke out.

So the word waibu, meaning external, but not waiguo, meaning foreign, was carefully chosen. But even if American ideas and Taiwan's "sunflower" movement did exert considerable influence on Hong Kong's Occupy protest, there are few, if any, provisions in our laws which would permit the authorities to clamp down on outside factors. The only legal provisions which deal with a connection with "foreign political bodies" and "political organisations of Taiwan" are those in the Societies Ordinance, under which terms like "connection", "foreign political body" and "political organisation of Taiwan" are so tightly defined that they cannot possibly be used to proscribe the sort of inspirational relationship which is likely to have existed between Taiwan's "sunflower" student moment and our Occupy protest.

It would be a totally different proposition if a foreign government is found to have funded undercover programmes, under the guise of public health or civic education programmes, to encourage regime change. The US State Department recently admitted to reviewing a secretive "democracy-promotion" programme in Cuba after investigations revealed that the US Agency for International Development had been involved in setting up Zun Zuneo, a Twitter-like service designed to recruit dissidents and foment "positive change", via a front company established and funded by USAid. If such activities are undertaken in Hong Kong, sophisticated legislation would be needed to outlaw activities which are not necessarily violent but calculated to instil instability by fomenting protests and calling for the head of government to step down.

The challenge goes beyond drafting laws to proscribe subversive actions. While clever legislation could always be devised to counter such action, it would be much harder to eradicate and counter ideas which have taken hold of people's hearts and minds. Hong Kong being what it is - an extremely open, international city which has always been receptive to and shaped by many ideas of the West - it would be extremely difficult to shut out some external ideas and influences deemed threatening while retaining others which have served the city well. For many Occupy supporters, democracy and freedom are two sides of the same coin It is only recently, when people discovered the "true democracy" narrative is false, or pushed so far that it has undermined the rule of law, that support for Occupy has started to recede.

To counter pernicious external influences, the government needs more than new, clever legislation, It needs a core, rational philosophy capable of countering international causes which have become, in the eyes of some, a just cause above the law. It needs a new narrative which makes "one country, two systems" and the achievement of the Basic Law once again appealing to Hong Kong people.

Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee is a legislator and chair of the New People's Party

 

[ControlFreak]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


Occupy Central co-founders hold 'community dialogue day' amid deepening divide

PUBLISHED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 6:46am
UPDATED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 8:28am

Joyce Ng [email protected]

Occupy Central co-founder Benny Tai with Hong Kong student leaders Alex Chow and Joshua Wong. Occupy volunteers, students and pan-democrat lawmakers will be stationed at 21 locations across the city to share their views on universal suffrage.

Occupy Central's founders may have become less visible at the protest sites, but they have been planning ways to take the fight for democracy beyond the occupied zones - starting with a "community dialogue day" today.

The news emerged after a three-hour discussion involving over 100 volunteers yesterday, which also addressed when or if the three co-founders, Benny Tai Yiu-ting, Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and Dr Chan Kin-man would turn themselves in to police.

While Tai, Chu and Chan declined to comment, others said the trio favoured turning themselves in early next month, although no consensus was reached as some felt they should focus on doing the groundwork for democracy first. "Some were concerned that if they followed the trio and turned themselves in, they wouldn't be able to contribute … any more," a volunteer said on condition of anonymity.

Today, Occupy volunteers, students and pan-democrat lawmakers will be stationed at 21 locations across the city to share their views on universal suffrage.

Ideas discussed yesterday included sending volunteers to knock on doors and set up street booths in neighbourhoods to explain more about democracy. Others involved encouraging people to patronise small shops instead of chain stores to break the economic dominance of conglomerates and developers.

On his Facebook page yesterday, Tai slammed the government for "hiding behind the court" by relying on injunctions granted to private parties to clear the protest site.

Meanwhile, Scholarism activist Wong Ting-wa was denied entry to the mainland at the Lok Ma Chau crossing. He is the student group's second member to be barred. Members of the Federation of Students were also blocked last week.

Wong said two Shenzhen police officers took him to a room at the checkpoint, and held him for 45 minutes. He had had his details taken by police when he and others stormed a forecourt at government headquarters on September 26.

A Baptist University student, an Occupy protester, was also blocked at the Shenzhen Bay checkpoint on Friday night.

 

[ControlFreak]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


Exco member Fanny Law says more talks possible if occupiers want them

Exco's Fanny Law says government likely to resume talks under framework set before

PUBLISHED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 7:18am
UPDATED : Sunday, 23 November, 2014, 7:18am

Joyce Ng [email protected]

Fanny Law says the government is likely to resume dialogue with student leaders of Occupy Central.

A top aide to Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying says the government is likely to resume dialogue with student leaders of Occupy Central if they accept its earlier offers to produce a report and form a consultative platform.

Executive Council member Fanny Law Fan Chiu-fun also said she was "upset" after a friend floated the idea of emigration because of "fears about the students, rather than the Communist Party", for taking a hard line on resolving the stalemate.

She urged the students to give up their civil disobedience struggle that has occupied Mong Kok, Admiralty and Causeway Bay for more than 50 days.

"I believe if the students accept what the chief secretary had offered earlier, she would be willing to resume talks," Law told a radio talk show yesterday.

On October 21, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor suggested, as a solution to end the protests, submitting a "report about public sentiments" to Beijing to reflect Occupy's demand for genuine universal suffrage, and to set up a multiple-front platform to discuss constitutional developments beyond the 2017 chief executive election.

Lam made the offers at a meeting with the Federation of Students that was televised around the world.

But the students said the proposals would not ease dissatisfaction with Beijing's framework for the 2017 poll, which put conditions on potential candidates.

"A dialogue without you bringing the full glare of the whole world's media to bear could take place more smoothly," Law added on the talk show.

Law, a local deputy to the National People's Congress, said she did not know why three representatives of the federation had their travel permits to the mainland invalidated as they were about to fly to Beijing to seek a meeting with state leaders last weekend.

She said the students should "reflect" on themselves.

Student protest leader Joshua Wong Chi-fung was later quoted as saying that Law's "upset" friend could move to a country without a Communist Party, but never to a country without youth.

 

[ControlFreak]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!

Occupy Central organizers limber up. The civil disobedience movement did more than most to push Beijing into showing Hong Kong who's the boss. Photo: HKEJ


​

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


Occupy protest organisers split over plan to hand themselves in to police

Student heads say they're staying but Occupy founders reveal they will hand themselves in

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 4:08am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:13pm

Jeffie Lam and Emily Tsang

A member of the public tells Federation of Students' Lester Shum that protests should not be staged at others' expense. Photo: Dickson Lee

The three co-founders of Occupy Central plan to turn themselves in to police next week but vowed to continue supporting protesters under a "two-stage" surrender plan.

But the decision, made after a meeting between the trio and their volunteers on Saturday, puts them at odds with student leaders - a major force behind the sit-ins - who said they would continue until they were arrested.

Under the tentative plan, the trio - Benny Tai Yiu-ting, the Reverend Chu Yiu-ming and Dr Chan Kin-man - and a small number of core supporters will turn themselves in to police on December 5, while another group of the civil disobedience movement's volunteers may follow suit after the pro-democracy sit-in ends.

"The two-stage plan aims at cooling down tensions on both sides," said a source close to the camp. "While we want to tell society that we do not intend to destroy the rule of law, we hope occupiers can understand that we are not deserting them."

They would continue to provide medical and legal assistance to protesters.

But Lester Shum, deputy secretary general of the Federation of Students, said: "We students think that it's not the right moment to turn ourselves in yet as we are inclined to finish the final step of civil disobedience by being arrested."

While both Labour Party stalwart Lee Cheuk-yan and Civil Party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit ruled out handing themselves in before the movement ended, the Democratic Party will meet Occupy Central co-founders tomorrow to decide their stance.

The Occupy trio originally intended to hand themselves in last Friday but decided to postpone it to observe how bailiffs cleared the Mong Kok site, which is now subject to an injunction order.

One occupier, Sies Chan Kwan-yin in Admiralty, said he would answer the calls of Occupy founders to retreat after they turned themselves in. "I agree that the movement has to end one day, and this is the right time," Chan said.

But another occupier, Yves Leung, said she would stay.

"We have to stay to put pressure on the authorities. If we leave now, the whole purpose of the movement would be gone."

A recent poll of more than 2,100 people in the sit-ins suggested that half would retreat if asked by campaign leaders.

Meanwhile, sit-in organisers kicked off a campaign yesterday to take the "umbrella movement" to the community, drawing a mixed response.

Teenage activists from protest group Scholarism who set up a street booth in Tseung Kwan O were pelted with water bombs.

Scholarism's leader, Joshua Wong Chi-fung, said masked men had harassed them at all five street stations. Wong was pushed to the ground at the station in Po Lam, Tseung Kwan O. His 27-year-old attacker, a roadside promoter for an internet service provider, was arrested for assault.

In Wan Chai, a man (pictured above) who only gave his surname, Ngan, jabbed a finger at Shum and said the democracy fight "should not be carried out at the expense of others".

But some pedestrians gave a thumbs up to the students.

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 5:17am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 5:17am

Occupy organisers should get out of their tents and finish what they started

Alice Wu says those who began the Occupy movement have a moral obligation to step up, take responsibility and end the protests

Alice Wu

The storming of the Legislative Council complex by a group of violent occupiers may have helped to end the movement sooner rather than later. Photo: Felix Wong

A "jaded" Occupy leader Benny Tai Yiu-ting barricaded himself inside his tent for days after government officials called off planned October 9 talks with student leaders. He tried to explain his brief bout of "autism" - as he termed it afterwards - by saying he didn't want to come out because he couldn't find solutions to some problems, and that "my brain just did not function well". In other words, Tai was discombobulated.

Today, it's clear that the movement that he began is becoming more discombobulated by the day. But it reached new heights last week, with the storming of the Legislative Council complex by a group of violent occupiers, who later tried hard to justify the violence to the media.

One said that a political issue was being viewed as a legal issue, and that storming Legco was a way of turning it back into a political one. That's warped logic for you.

Others said they were furious at seeing the barricades in the occupied area around Citic Tower being removed by bailiffs. But surely loads of people are, arguably, just as furious about protesters occupying public roads. They took their fury to the courts, not on to the streets by breaking things. But there's no arguing with some of the protesters.

In a sense, Occupy has become something of a sequel to Donnie Darko, in which a bright student is visited on occasion by a demonic six-foot rabbit who often urges him to perform dangerous and destructive pranks.

There was at least one Legco protester who believed he had no choice: "If we do nothing, then we're just waiting for this movement to end." However, no one bothered to tell him that, after what lawmaker Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung described as a "a fatal blow" to campaigner's electoral chances, he may have helped to end the movement sooner rather than later. But, as Cheung himself found out, there's no reasoning with them.

And what should we make of the mad dash by politicians involved in getting Occupy up and running to distance themselves from these people? Why suddenly draw a line, when they have been smudging the lines on the rule of law up to now? It's obvious that what they have been practising is simply unadulterated political buffoonery.

Ironically, as buffoonery and discombobulations go, blaming everything on Donnie may make perfect sense. Occupy should have ended a long time ago, when words like "exit strategies" still made sense - before it degenerated into a dead-end situation. The University of Hong Kong survey, conducted even before the storming of Legco last Wednesday, showed that nearly 83 per cent of Hongkongers want Occupy to end. No amount of publicly expressed condemnation will get them out of this political quagmire.

Hongkongers may have become accustomed to living life circumventing obstructions and disruption, but we may not be as generous and accommodating towards those who refuse to take the responsibility and moral obligation to end what they started. Don't blame it on being dazed and confused, and don't blame it on the dazed and confused, either.

Alice Wu is a political consultant and a former associate director of the Asia Pacific Media Network at UCLA

 

[Helder Postiga]

All hands needed on deck to keep Hong Kong's ship of state afloat

Mike Rowse suggests an action plan for the government to solve the political reform crisis

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 5:17am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 5:17am

Mike Rowse

We need to remember that Hong Kong is above all else the city that works, the place that gets things done. Photo: EPA

Unkind critics might claim that Hong Kong's ship of state has already sunk. Even friends of the administration, among whose dwindling number I still count myself, would have to concede that it seems at times to have become becalmed.

What true friends do at such times is offer suggestions about what to do next. So here's my action plan.

First, the government must submit a formal written report to Beijing about local reaction to the ruling by the National People's Congress Standing Committee on political reform. Yes, they already know. But that is not the point. It was the one sensible thing the government offered in the recent debate with the students and even though the latter did not accept it as sufficient, nonetheless it would be the right thing to do.

Second, the government must publish a green paper setting out the options for reform of the Legislative Council elections in 2016 and 2020. It must commit to scrapping corporate voting by 2020 and promise to work with as many functional constituencies as possible to achieve it for some in 2016. It must set thresholds for the minimum number of voters that will enable individual functional constituencies to survive, failing which they will lose their seat. It must promise a further review after 2020, and state that outright abolition will be one of the options.

The government should then make some modest proposals for reform of the geographic constituencies. The idea recently floated of pairing up the 18 districts so we end up with nine constituencies instead of the present five has a ring to it.

Third, the government should publish a green paper on options for election of the chief executive for 2017 and thereafter. Even though we are stuck with a 1,200 member nominating committee, divided into four broad sectors of 300 each, there is still much scope for meaningful reform within those sectors, and with the way the representatives are chosen. As many members as possible should be elected by respectably sized groups.

Fourth, the government needs to take the lead in getting Legco and its committees working smoothly again. The trouble began when the pro-administration members did not respect the tradition of sharing out the positions of chairman and vice-chairman of the various committees in a fair way, but instead hogged most of the key posts. The pan-democrats responded by waiting until the last minute and all putting their names down for membership of the public works and establishment subcommittees of the Finance Committee.

Having secured the chairmanship of both, they then began to play games with the agenda to give low priority to items the administration thought deserved precedence. The government struck back, withdrawing all the items preferred by the pan-dems. Oh what a lovely war! But the end result is that the people's business is not getting done.

Someone needs to knock heads together and bring us back to a sensible compromise.

The government could rescue the agenda by withdrawing all its seven preferred items and submitting a revised agenda of two: one supported by the pan-democrats and one of its own priorities. Then, it could put forward four items for the next meeting, two from the pan-dems list, two from its own, and so on.

But what we need most of all is a fair wind. We need to remember that Hong Kong is above all else the city that works, the place that gets things done. If we have forgotten that, then indeed our home will sink without trace, and who will risk their own life to save it?

Mike Rowse is managing director of Stanton Chase International and an adjunct professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. [email protected]

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: Give me Liberty or Give me Death! Giordano Tycoon joins Occupy Central!


Rally in support of police ahead of clearance

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am

Timmy Sung [email protected]

Pro-police marchers called for peace. Photo: Jonathan Wong

About 50 people took part in a rally at Kowloon Park in Tsim Sha Tsui yesterday to express their support for the police force ahead of the expected clearance of protesters from the Mong Kok Occupy site this week.

The rally, aimed at uniting Hong Kong, was organised by pro-Beijing legislator Dr Priscilla Leung Mei-fun of the Business and Professionals Alliance.

She told the crowd that the Occupy Central movement had created conflicts among Hong Kong families.

"The movement has turned into hatred and struggle, not love and peace," she said.

Former assistant police commissioner Tang How-kong also spoke at the rally. He said that while there were no easy ways to solve the political impasse, using violence would not work either.

"The impact of Occupy Central is powerful; don't look at it simply like a fairy tale," he said.

Bailiffs are expected to remove barricades set up by protesters on a section of Argyle Street in Mong Kok as early as Tuesday. Police have said they will give bailiffs their fullest support in executing an injunction order from the court.

On Friday, two judges refused a protester permission to appeal against the order and upheld the injunction that authorises bailiffs and police to help clear the Mong Kok sit-in site.

When asked why the force was not taking the initiative to enforce the law, Tang said it was "unrealistic" to expect the police to move in unless there was a majority support from Hongkongers.

Waving blue flags that read "Love peace, support police", many of the participants wore blue ribbons that symbolised support for police.

One of the protesters said she felt there was a need to support the police.

"The officers are only maintaining law and order. But many protesters challenged, provoked and swore at them.

"If they know ordinary residents like me have come to support them, it may make them feel their job is worth it," she said.

The rally, which ran for more than three hours, featured videos and songs that mocked the movement.

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: Give me Liberty or Give me Death! Giordano Tycoon joins Occupy Central!


Health workers safety at risk after police fire tear gas, says report

Medical report says volunteer medics were put in an unsafe position and had to abandon stations after police fired canisters at protesters

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 7:42pm

Emily Tsang [email protected]

Medical student Henry Pang says he hope the report will help achieve a better treatment protocol in the future.

Police fired several rounds of tear gas near medical stations on the first day of the Occupy Central protests and created an unsafe environment for humanitarian workers, a report in the Medical Association's monthly magazine says.

The article, in the association's October edition, said 191 health care workers were manning six medical outposts in Admiralty on September 28, but four of the outposts were destroyed in the melee after police fired tear gas at the crowds and many medical supplies were lost or damaged.

Medical student Henry Pang, from the University of Hong Kong's department of orthopedics and traumatology, wrote the report. He said: "The paper does not contain any political stance.

"It is the factual account of my own personal experience from a medical point of view as one of several coordinators [of the medical work] on September 28."

"I hoped it would offer a detailed descriptive document of the critical event, so that there could be improvement in the police's handling of health workers, and to achieve a better treatment protocol in the future."

He said he was in the process of writing a more detailed paper to be submitted to international medical journals.

The report said 78 of the 191 volunteer health workers were medical and nursing students, 26 were doctors from both the public and private sectors, and others were nurses, first-aiders and paramedics.

Pang said the effort to help the injured had been complicated by a lack of medical supplies and communication difficulties at the scene. As the movement was mainly "self-initiated", he said there was no single specific organisation providing medical support.

Many outposts were totally unaware of the presence of other outposts, which led to an uneven distribution of manpower and resources.

"Due to the early start of the umbrella movement, its change in location and the number of walk-in volunteers, much of the preparation was not in effect at the time," he wrote.

After the first tear gas canisters were fired at about 5pm, more than 50 adult protesters were treated for eye and nose irritation, while five complained of shortness of breath due to inhalation of the gas.

The report said tear gas deployed near one outpost on Connaught Road created an "unsafe environment to provide humanitarian medical care" and disabled four stations as health care volunteers were forced to retreat to Wan Chai.

Many medical outposts lacked adequate respirators, eye shields, saline, automated external defibrillators and pulse and blood pressure meters. But there was an abundant supply of bottled water, surgical masks and wound management kits.

Pang said most volunteers were asked to retreat before midnight because of a rumour there would be a crackdown - one of many rumours floating around during the demonstrations - which proved to be unfounded.

Only about 20 doctors and nurses stayed at the Wan Chai medical outpost, knowing the high risk and danger involved.

"Utmost respect is given to all health care volunteers and supporters," Pang wrote.

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: Give me Liberty or Give me Death! Giordano Tycoon joins Occupy Central!


69,000 postcards carry message of Occupy

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am

Tony Cheung [email protected]

Ivan Wong puts his love for postcards to good use recording the Occupy protests. Photo: Jonathan Wong

When Ivan Wong printed more than 1,000 postcards about the Occupy Central movement and gave them out early last month, never did he imagine his lone effort would evolve into a three-part campaign churning out 69,000 postcards with the help of a dozen volunteers.

That campaign ended on November 9, after scores of people lined up outside Admiralty Centre on Harcourt Road to pick their favourites among 30 designs.

Symbols and slogans of Occupy characterised the cards - the iconic yellow umbrella, the line "fearless in civil disobedience", and photos of Harcourt Road evening rallies or the Lion Rock, from which climbers hung a huge banner on October 23 declaring "I want real universal suffrage".

Wong, a postcard collector, said he spent a dollar producing each card. At first "I was not concerned" about the political debate, the freelance events producer, 24, said.

"But after police fired tear gas at protesters on September 28, I came over … and stayed a few nights on Lung Wo Road."

That was when he drew inspiration from his hobby, creating his own postcards that recorded the "umbrella movement, a historic period for Hong Kong".

The first batch of cards, bearing six or seven designs, were snapped up in a matter of hours at the Admiralty occupied zone. Wong then invited donations on local chat room HKGolden.com so he could print more.

"I thought I would only get a few thousand dollars, but I got more than HK$10,000 in about three days. [That was enough] for me to print 18,000 more and give them out last month."

As support from donors, designers and photographers continued, Wong and some new friends he had made at Occupy launched their final postcard distribution - 50,000 cards of 30 designs over three nights from November 7 to 9.

"We are happy because many people like the postcards. The campaign generated much positive energy. I'm just doing my part to make Admiralty happier."

With the fervour having subsided, Wong has returned to work with no plan to launch a fourth stage of his campaign. But he hopes the 69,000 postcards have helped spread Hongkongers' democracy cause around the globe.

"A staff member from the airport's airmail centre told me he had seen a lot of these postcards sent overseas," he said. "So even if the government stands firm [on electoral reform], Hongkongers have won many victories - a generation is awakening and social movement is no longer about merely marching on the streets and then going home" - even if officials were not listening.

 

[ControlFreak]

Judge Kemal Bokhary tells occupiers to obey law in TV interview

PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 6:39am

Ng Kang-chung and Alice Yan

Mr Justice Kemal Bokhary says however much one may think a court order is wrong, one should obey it.

Outspoken Mr Justice Kemal Bokhary, a non-permanent judge at the Court of Final Appeal known for his liberal rulings, has urged Occupy activists to stay calm and obey the law.

Bokhary also said Beijing's ruling on Hong Kong's electoral reforms was "less than what I had hoped for", but believed Hongkongers could work out a solution to the present impasse.

Bokhary made a rare departure from the practice of judges not speaking out to the media.

In an interview broadcast by ATV last night, Bokhary rejected suggestions by some lawmakers that people need not obey the law if they have a "higher principle" to pursue.

The judge told host Michael Chugani that "if the court makes an order, however much you may think the order is wrong, you should obey it".

He was referring to the recent row over the court orders for Occupy protesters to leave some of their sites. "It is a bit difficult to see how disobedience of a court order would not have an impact on rule of law," he said.

The Civic Party's Alan Leong Kah-kit, also a barrister, had earlier argued that rule of law was more than obeying the laws made by the government.

Democratic Party lawmaker Albert Ho Chun-yan, also a lawyer, also said the rule of law did not mean "blind" compliance with all laws.

"Sometimes in some places the law is so oppressive that anybody in opposition to the regime will come up against the oppressive law," Bokhary said.

"In a place like Hong Kong, I don't think we have that kind of situation."

The judge said occupying roads was not the only way to press for democracy, and that those who were affected in their daily lives also had an interest to protect.

"It is a time when I think we all have to keep as calm as we can … to be resolute and determined in pressing what we want, but also have to regard the law and order dimension of society," he said.

Meanwhile, an employee who wrote editorials for Communist Party mouthpiece the Jiaxing Daily in Zhejiang has been sacked for his posts lambasting the party on his personal microblog account.

Wang Yaofeng's microblog was noticed by internet users and circulated widely on a smartphone-based social-media platform last week. He soon deleted the contents of the account, but many of his posts were saved by internet users.

 

[ControlFreak]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


PUBLISHED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 3:14pm
UPDATED : Monday, 24 November, 2014, 3:14pm

For those who dare, Hong Kong remains the place to be

Peter Kammerer says while he shares protesters' frustrations with high-priced housing, he believes opportunities are there for the taking

Peter Kammerer

The housing scene in Hong Kong is not so kind, but doors open to those who are willing to learn and are patient. Photo: AP

Generations are different in the way they think, but their aspirations have always been the same: to own a place that they can call their own. I'm more than half a century old and I still don't have that. Circumstances got in the way, among them raising two children and some poor investments, but that doesn't mean I can't afford a flat. If I quit my job, I could turn 25 years of pension into a 600 sq ft box in Tseung Kwan O or Kornhill. If I did that, my dilemma would be: what now?

I would be 52 and have little in the bank, necessitating years more work to save for my eventual retirement at an age perhaps well beyond 70. For the sake of owning a home, I would have to count on winning the lottery or getting lucky with the stock market to feel comfortable about my future. The alternative: get out of Hong Kong and go somewhere where the property and cost of living are more affordable. That's obviously easy for someone with a foreign passport to say.

With such options, it is not difficult to be sympathetic towards the protesting students. Leaving the city they were born and raised in, and love, is not an option for the majority. Look beyond their desire for genuinely democratic elections and it is about the future. With property prices at record highs, good jobs in short supply for anyone other than the best graduates from the top universities, and tourists seemingly of greater importance than citizens to the government, there is every reason to be unhappy.

They have a right to be angry - unlike those of us who got their feet on the ladder in easier times, they are at the bottom and have what appears an impossible climb. It especially rankles that it is government officials who live in the lap of luxury who are telling them that they can't have what they want. But let's get real - only those who are well-heeled and have connections can get what they want, and Hong Kong is far from being the only place in the world like that. It's also tough for the young in Europe, the US and any other place where desirable jobs are in short supply and housing prices steep.

The best jobs are usually to be found in big cities and that's where housing costs are highest. Low interest rates haven't helped; flats have for some time been one of the best places to invest and that exacerbates circumstances. Throw in Hong Kong's land shortage, government control of supply and the exorbitant cost of what it releases and the recipe is unpalatable for the have-nots. Those with guaranteed jobs and annual pay rises, and access to great perks - civil servants, many of whom end up in the top echelons of government, are such people - are the ones with the best chance of getting what they want.

It's all about being a realist. I've had opportunities to join the housing haves, but either passed them up or was unlucky. There's always another occasion or time. It's a matter of being patient and, when seeing a chance, taking it.

There aren't many cities like Hong Kong. Those with a smart idea and the drive to succeed will always find a way to get ahead. The business environment gives every opportunity. The housing scene is not so kind, but doors open to those who are willing to learn and are patient.

Peter Kammerer is a senior writer at the Post

 

[streetcry]

HK police spray protesters, arrest 32 in bid to clear road

[h=2]More than 30 people were arrested on Tuesday (Nov 25) as police, wearing helmets and with some holding batons, tried to disperse a crowd of around 100 protesters who had refused to leave after workers tore down barricades on a street in the district of Mongkok.[/h]

HONG KONG: Hong Kong police sprayed pro-democracy protesters on Tuesday (Nov 25) and made 80 arrests as they moved in to clear a city street blocked by demonstrators for nearly two months. A police spokeswoman told AFP the arrests in Mongkok district were made for criminal contempt of a court order requiring the clearing of the street, for assaulting police and for unlawful assembly.


Officers in helmets, with some carrying batons, faced off against dozens of protesters at the site in Mongkok district, the scene of some of the most violent clashes between demonstrators and authorities since the sit-ins began in three locations on Sep 28. A police spokesman was unable to confirm what officers were spraying, as protesters complained of being burned by the substance. Officers at the scene described it as "tear spray".


"I couldn't open my eyes," a demonstrator surnamed Mok told AFP. "I was wearing long sleeves but my arms are hurting." Another, who gave his name as Yiu, said the substance was "much stronger than pepper spray" used on earlier occasions by police.

 

[streetcry]

Re: HK police spray protesters, arrest 32 in bid to clear road

"You are already participating in an illegal assembly; right now the police order you all to immediately disperse," officers told protesters over loudspeakers before firing the spray at them from elevated platforms. Demonstrators donned goggles or raised umbrellas to protect themselves.

Police arrested 80 people during the day when protesters refused to leave after workers tore down their barricades on Argyle Street in Mongkok.

Authorities said those arrested, including veteran lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung, were detained for contempt of court and assault on police. The youngest was a 14-year-old boy, said a lawyer working for the protesters.


"I am not going to move. I will let them arrest me," 78-year-old Ng Pun-tuk, wearing a helmet, told AFP earlier as he joined the crowd of protesters watched by dozens of bailiffs and more than 100 police. "This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to achieve democracy. I am prepared to go to jail," said Ng.


The Mongkok site is the second to be partially cleared since the high court in the semi-autonomous Chinese city granted injunctions to let authorities start dismantling sections of the three protest camps. The court injunction for Tuesday only covered Argyle Street. Police are expected to begin clearing busy Nathan Road in Mongkok on Wednesday morning, reports said.

Demonstrators are protesting at China's restrictions on who will be allowed to stand in elections for the city's next leader in 2017.


STILL OPEN TO TALKS

The student-led protests drew tens of thousands of people on some occasions initially. But the crowds have shrunk as the movement has struggled to maintain momentum and commuters have grown weary of transport disruptions.


The spectacle of a small group smashing up a side entrance to Hong Kong's legislature last week has further sapped public support. A Hong Kong University poll of 513 people last week found that 83 per cent of respondents want the road blockades to end.


China insists candidates in 2017 must be vetted by a loyalist committee - an arrangement which protesters say will ensure the election of a pro-Beijing stooge. Talks between protesters and senior Hong Kong officials a month ago were fruitless, with students accusing the government of failing to make any meaningful offers.


"I haven't completely closed the door on negotiations with the Hong Kong Federation of Students," the city's second highest official, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam, told reporters on Tuesday during a trip in Beijing. "I really hope that we could all sit down ... to talk about the future of Hong Kong's political development. "If student representatives can concretely negotiate a mechanism where they leave voluntarily, we would welcome it," Lam said.


On Tuesday last week, government workers dismantled metal barricades blocking access to a skyscraper opposite government headquarters on the edge of the sprawling main protest camp in the central district of Admiralty.


- AFP/al

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 5:10am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 5:38am

Patten can speak out but reform is up to Hong Kong

Alex Lo [email protected]

Chris Patten faulted officials for failing to engage student leaders. Photo: AFP

Like many Hong Kong people, I am fond of "Fat Pang", our last governor. So unlike Beijing loyalists and others who are firmly in the pro-establishment and government camps, I am not ready to dismiss out of hand the many home truths that Chris Patten told a US commission last week - as well as statements he recently made to British lawmakers - about our city.

But on the other hand, he also takes a completely "pan-democratic" stance and makes some disingenuous statements difficult to square with realities on the ground here.

Who can argue with him when he said officials had failed to show "statesmanship"? It would be unfair to blame every major problem Hong Kong now faces on Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, but he has shown a singular lack of leadership and complete inability to communicate with the public. His weaknesses have been especially exposed by the Occupy movement, our worst political crisis since the handover. Unfortunately, you can say the same about pan-democratic leaders in the legislature who have completely failed to rise to the occasion and gain political capital out of the protests. In fact, they appear even more clueless and obstructive than before.

Patten also faulted officials for failing to engage student leaders. But the students are unwilling to compromise and the government is unable to move forward without Beijing's sanction. Any further talks would have been futile other than as a show of good will. Patten is right that Britain has obligations towards Hong Kong - honour bound as he puts it - under the Joint Declaration. But which obligations need to be honoured here? He is too seasoned and professional a politician to say Beijing has breached the joint treaty, yet he has certainly created that impression.

The alleged breach or breaches are taken as axiomatic without the need for proof in pan-democratic circles. This is a large topic that warrants a separate column. Suffice to say it would be very difficult and unrealistic for Britain to take action against China for alleged breaches even if it were so inclined. The real battle is over interpreting the Basic Law for political reform, but that is really a domestic matter in which Britain, or any other country, has no part.

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


How Scottish independence debate can help solve Occupy deadlock

Scotland's independence debate seems a world away from Occupy Central, but it may offer lessons on how to end the deadlock facing Hong Kong

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 5:11am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 5:11am

Cliff Buddle [email protected]

Illustration: Lau Ka-kuen

The people of Scotland went to the polls on September 18 to vote on whether their country should become independent from the United Kingdom. Ten days later, Occupy Central protesters took to the streets of Hong Kong to demand genuine universal suffrage.

These two events, separated by 9,600km, may seem a world apart. But there are parallels to be drawn. Both concern ground-breaking constitutional reform and raise questions about the best way to achieve it. Both have sparked a surge in political participation, especially among the young. And both have led to unexpected and unpredictable consequences.

No one can say for sure how either situation will play out. But the visit to Hong Kong this month by one of Britain's leading political and constitutional experts provided an opportunity to gain insight into events in the UK - and to see if there are lessons Hong Kong can learn as it seeks to end the deadlock.

Charlie Jeffery, senior vice-principal of the University of Edinburgh, is a professor of politics and a specialist in constitutional change. He has advised the British government and parliament, led research on the future of the UK and played a leading role in the debate about Scotland's independence referendum.

Many students at the University of Edinburgh come from Hong Kong and the mainland. Jeffery was here to further ties and to deliver a speech at the Foreign Correspondents Club on the implications of the referendum.

People watching from Hong Kong may be forgiven for thinking that when Scotland voted "no" to independence that would be the end of the matter. But Jeffery points to a "chain reaction" caused by the independence vote, which could yet bring a constitutional shake-up to the UK.

"I have been using this chain-reaction metaphor from the physical world, and I think the idea suggests there can be all sorts of different paths set loose by that reaction, and we are not sure which one will be the dominant one. There are all sorts of uncertainties," he said.

Charlie Jeffery

Those events began with an opinion poll shortly before the referendum that suggested a shock vote in favour of Scottish independence might be on the way. That had leaders of the UK's leading political parties scrambling to woo "no" votes by offering further powers to Scotland's parliament if the country chose to stay part of Britain.

Jeffery said the outcome of the vote - 55 per cent against independence and 45 per cent for - was not a surprise: "I think the odds were always for a 'no' victory. If you take that literally, the bookies were always clear this would be a 'no' victory. In the end it was possibly a bit more definitive than expected."

But what did surprise him was the reaction of Britain's prime minister, David Cameron. The day after the vote, Cameron announced that while the pledge to devolve more powers from Westminster to Scotland would be honoured, that must be in tandem with furthering the interests of other parts of the UK. "We have heard the voice of Scotland - and now the millions of voices of England must also be heard," he said.

"A lot of people went to bed thinking it was all about Scotland and woke up hearing the prime minister talking about England. So constitutional reform for England is now on the agenda sparked by what happened in Scotland."

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own legislatures with certain powers devolved to them from Westminster. The same is not true of England. This has led to calls from people in England for more of a say.

"It is clear people in England are unsatisfied with the current arrangements. They think the political system does not give them a voice in the way it does to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland through the devolved institutions. So there is a popular concern that Cameron was responding to," said Jeffery.

Cameron proposed allowing only English MPs to vote on English matters in Westminster.

"That is not really a solution to the problem because it only gets at the end of the process in forming legislation. We need earlier stages in the process to make the whole thing work. That means a capacity to think about England as a political unit," said Jeffery.

"Constitutional reform in England is really challenging," he added. This is partly because of England's greater size but also because the government of England is so bound up with the government of the UK as a whole. "It is quite difficult to disentangle England from the rest in order to produce an institutional form which will sensibly collect and represent and pursue the interests of people in England."

Scottish "Yes" campaigners the day before the referendum. Photo: Reuters

Another surprise has been a dramatic surge in membership for the Scottish National Party, prime movers in the push for independence, since the referendum. It is now the third biggest party in the UK.

These events are reshaping British politics. The opposition Labour party, which campaigned for a "no" vote in the referendum, looks as if it might now lose Scottish seats in Westminster in next year's general election.

Meanwhile, Cameron's move to support greater influence for England is probably driven by short-term political objectives, says Jeffery. The prime minister's Conservative Party is facing strong opposition from the UK Independence Party, described by Jeffery as "something like England's nationalist party".

The need to combat UKIP, which takes a strong line on immigration, has also led Cameron to talk tough on the UK's membership of the European Union. He has promised another referendum, this time to decide whether Britain should stay in the EU, by 2017, raising fresh challenges. Support for membership of the EU is much stronger in Scotland than in England.

Constitutional change in the UK is taking place in an unpredictable way, with one development prompting another. "That's the way it has always been done in the UK," said Jeffery. "No one has ever taken big picture thinking."

Scottish "No" supporters the day after the referendum. Photo: EPA

He added: "That leaves us in a position which is largely disintegrative. You adapt to whatever the situation is for one part of the UK, and it has a spillover effect somewhere else. You adapt to that, onward and onward, and there is nothing in the centre holding it all together. I think the trajectory is for the UK to become ever looser in the union it provides for its component parts."

While the way these events will develop is uncertain, Jeffery says there are positives that can be taken away from the process by which the decision on Scottish independence was made.

The British government, which does not support Scottish independence, gambled on a referendum - and the gamble paid off. Jeffery said the decision to allow the vote was intended to ensure support for independence did not strengthen. "That demand was allowed to be expressed and those expressions opposed. It produced an outcome which is that Scotland is not independent."

Jeffery said: "I am not sure what the read-across for Hong Kong from all that is. But it does suggest if there is openness to the expression of the popular will, it will not bring the world crashing down."

The professor said the Occupy protests would have been cleared by police had they occurred in the UK. "Imagine occupy protesters in London had blocked roads around the House of Commons. I think protesters would have been moved with, necessarily, an element of force. I think it is quite remarkable that the authorities [in Hong Kong] have not used that kind of force."

He added: "There is probably a little bit of an element of double standards from countries from outside Hong Kong if you imagine such scenes [elsewhere]. Police would have moved in and moved them out. That has not happened here. That is probably quite a good thing."

Electoral democracy does not necessarily appeal to everyone living under such a system, said Jeffery. But he does not believe the business sector loses influence under a democratic system, as has been suggested by some commentators in Hong Kong and the mainland.

"I don't see that business is un-influential in the UK. The influence happens in a different way. That's why all the major political parties get financed significantly by businesses because they are effectively lobbying for their voice to be heard. That's also part of democracy.

"There are plenty of other places in the world which have great economic dynamism amid democracy and don't suffer for it. You will probably find business interests are powerful in the way in which they interact with political parties."

In the Scottish referendum, big business was mostly against independence and made its position clear. This had a significant impact on public opinion, said Jeffery.

The professor said he knew very little about the details of the situation in Hong Kong and was not in a position to give advice. But he believes it is important that whatever process is adopted for constitutional reform must be seen as a legitimate one.

"The Scottish referendum was a great example of that. The two sides said 'we will abide by the result whatever it is'. That was really important. But then the level of civic engagement was very high, including much that wasn't organised by the campaigns or the political parties. It was self-organised both in terms of formal meetings in village halls and so on, but also in conversations on the bus. People were in everyday settings talking about Scotland's constitutional future."

That was reflected in the fact that 97 per cent of eligible voters registered for the referendum and 85 per cent voted. "I think it is impressive, and it gives the outcome legitimacy. Other situations have to find their own way to legitimacy. Whatever happens [in Hong Kong], has got to happen in a way which ultimately brings the consent of people on different sides of the argument."

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: HK Protest Leaders High! Demands Talks With 11 Jinping In Peking!


First Occupy site cleared as angry Hong Kong protesters stand watch

Officers to give their 'fullest support' to bailiffs reclaiming protest site today, but do not expect violence as most protesters say they will retreat

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 5:11am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 6:14pm

Samuel Chan, Ernest Kao and Chris Lau

Police officers arrive to assist the bailiffs formed a line at the intersection to prevent demonstrators from reoccupying the area. Photo: Sam Tsang

Hong Kong bailiffs tasked to enforce a court order against a key protest camp have successfully torn down barricades at an intersection in Mong Kok, after a tense face-off with pro-democracy demonstrators.

The 20-man "removal team" cleared the juction of Argyle Street and Nathan Road in just 45 minutes. They cut the plastic cordons, tape and strong adhesives that held the barricades in place, and confiscated wooden pallets, fencing and umbrellas.

With the barricades cleared at around 11.15am, the bailiffs breached the protest zone and moved to dismantle remaining tents.

Police officers, deployed to assist the bailiffs if necessary, formed a line at the intersection to prevent demonstrators from reoccupying the area. Minutes later, some officers, yelling "Open the road", began pushing back protesters in an apparent attempt to clear a passage for debris to be carried away to a waiting truck.

However, the passage wasn't used, prompting Federation of Students activist Yvonne Leung to question why police "stepped in".

"Police should explain when it's right to intervene," she said, adding the court document requires police to disclose when and if their assistance is requested by the bailiffs. "The protesters have the right to know."

One of the bailiffs confirmed they asked for police assistance, but did not say why.

Hours into the operation, the bailiffs' action slowed down somewhat as they were faced down by hordes of protesters, who demanded they be allowed to personally move a stack of wooden boards which was used as a "stage". Some Occupy supporters also loudly complained that the injunction was "not clear enough".

After negotiations between student activists and the removal team, the demonstrators were given 30 minutes to do the job.

Protesters wear masks in case pepper spray and tear gas is fired while facing off with bailiffs and police. Photo: Sam Tsang

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, speaking to the Executive Council this morning, said he believed the police would handle the clearance professionally. “I have full confidence in the police’s professionalism and its law enforcement,” he said.

The clearance had kicked off in earnest at about 10.30am, about an hour after the bailiffs arrived and lawyer Maggie Chan Man-ki, the legal counsel for Chiu Luen Public Light Bus Company which obtained an injunction to clear the street, read out the court order.

A bailiff gave protesters 30 minutes to pack their belongings.

"Occupiers should pack up and leave now. Otherwise, [their belongings] would be dealt with as disposed items and rubbish," Chan said.

She warned protesters not to intervene with bailiffs' actions, or else police might step in. Protesters would face contempt of court, she added.

In response, protesters in masks and helmets shouted: "I want true elections" and "We want real suffrage". They also held up three fingers - a protest reference from the sci-fi film The Hunger Games, in which fictional denizens rise up against an authoritarian regime.

Bailiffs tear down barricades. Photo: Dickson Lee

Federation of Students representative Leung shot back questions at the minibus group's lawyer over megaphone. "I want to ask if Chan can show me the map first," Leung said, adding Chan should clarify which area they intend to clear and what would constitute "obstructive behaviour".

"They need to label the cleared barricades. Otherwise they are abusing their duties," Leung said of the bailiffs in a later interview. She said she would stay in Mong Kok with about five other HKFS members.

Protesters made no moves to resist as the removal team, clad in white helmets and wearing gloves, began tearing down the barricades at the intersection, near the HSBC building.

Student Kim Ng, 20, said: "We'll keep doing what we can to show our determination [for free elections] as they clear the site" by chanting slogans and holding up banners.

Some protesters have donned protective equipment including helmets and masks, in a sign that some are wary of the possibility of a forceful clear-out.

"I'm confident our people won't clash with [the police]. But I can't say the same for the other side," said protester Zero Lam Tat-wing, adding that he believed many protesters would return to retake the streets, in a different area, if the Argyle Street camp is dismantled. Several tents still remain in the zone.

Meanwhile, speaking in Beijing on Tuesday, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said the police would give full support to the bailiffs during the operation.

“If the road can be cleared, it would be a relief to those members of the public and businesses that have been affected for almost two months,” she said.

Police move in to prevent protesters from reoccupying the area. Photo: Sam Tsang

Lam, who is visiting the Chinese capital with three senior Hong Kong officials, said the government was always open to resuming dialogue with the Federation of Students, one of three major groups leading the movement.

But Lam, who represented the government in a crisis dialogue with student activists last month, stressed that the students had to abandon any preconditions - including for Beijing to rescind a decision on Hong Kong election reform - if they want a new round of talks.

“We always welcome [discussions on] political reform with the federation, in a pragmatic manner,” she said.

About 3,000 police officers were said to be on standby this morning.

The operation, which may last two days or more, will also include clearance of blockades set up along Nathan Road, a police source said yesterday.

At 7am today, at least 80 police officers were standing by at the intersection of Nathan Road and Argyle Street and another 20 on the junction of Argyle and Portland Street. Throngs of journalists had also arrived on the scene.

Protester Ken Chu, wearing a full gas mask, said he put on his "defence equipment" as a precaution. "In the past, police have treated protesters with sudden and inappropriate force. I hope there will be no such case today as police are only here to assist bailiffs. I of course will stay till the end," said Chu.

However, the police force foresaw little likelihood of violence and officers would not get directly involved unless protesters resisted bailiffs' enforcement of injunctions or more hands were needed to carry away obstacles, the source said.

Protesters take down a tent on Argyle Street on Tuesday morning. Some moved supplies to the Nathan Road camp. Photo: Ernest Kao

"[The protesters] also want to leave. It will only be a show if there's any resistance," the source said as the Occupy movement, demanding democracy and the right of voters to nominate candidates for the 2017 chief executive election, entered its 58th day.

"They will be given sufficient warning and time to leave before any arrest is made."

Apart from the bus firm, two taxi groups were granted a similar injunction in respect of Nathan Road.

Earlier this morning, protesters moved tents and supplies from Argyle Street to Nathan Road, two hours ahead of a clearance operation.

Police said last night they would give "the fullest support" to the bailiffs in their execution of the court orders and would take "resolute action" if anyone resisted or tried to return to the cleared zones or occupy other areas.

The source said police still aimed to start clearing Mong Kok's main occupation zone on Nathan Road tomorrow.

Officers will be deployed in Mong Kok two hours before bailiffs start removing obstacles at 9am today.

The crowd in Mong Kok remained peaceful yesterday, as two bailiffs and a legal representative from Kwong and Associates, for the taxi groups, arrived to put up injunction orders.

Tents set up by pro-democracy protesters in Mong Kok. Photo: Felix Wong

People Power lawmaker Albert Chan Wai-yip said some of the group's members would stay and surrender to arrest.

But most protesters said they intended to retreat.

Psychology student William Yu, 20, said there was no point resisting and getting arrested.

"I'll stay until the last moment. When they ask me to go, then I'll leave," he said.

Yu said he would be happy to accept alternative proposals to help Hong Kong achieve a real election but he had become fed up with the government's lack of response.

Protester Amy Pat, 19, said she had already asked her friends and people at resource stations to pack.

But accounting student Water Lee, 20, said he would try to stop the removal if enough people supported the idea.

"If I were afraid [of being arrested], I wouldn't have been out here over the past month," he said, insisting on both public nomination and the scrapping of the Legislative Council functional constituencies.

Meanwhile, police removed the tents and other belongings of about 20 pro-democracy protesters from a section of pavement outside the British consulate on Supreme Court Road in Admiralty at around 7am yesterday.

The group had occupied the vehicle entrance since Friday. Most of them moved to a nearby demonstration area designated by police after a warning from officers. One protester was carried away by officers but returned to the demonstration zone.

Additional reporting by Danny Mok and Lai Ying-kit

 

[Helder Postiga]

Having tasted freedom, Hong Kong will never settle for a fake democracy

Robert Boxwell says even if the streets are cleared of protesters, their fight for the vote will persist

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 12:12pm
UPDATED : Wednesday, 26 November, 2014, 4:49am

Robert Boxwell

Many in Hong Kong now realise a rich life doesn't always mean making more money. They might leave the streets, but they will never leave the idea of democracy. Photo: AFP

I was in Bangkok in May 1992, staying a few miles from where 100,000 Thais had converged to protest at the appointment of Suchinda Kraprayoon as prime minister. Suchinda was one of the generals who led a coup in 1991 to oust a government that the military complained was filled with corrupt politicians - "unusually rich" was the Thai term for them.

In March 1992, fresh elections were held, ostensibly to give a clean government back to the people. But a coalition of military-friendly parties "invited" Suchinda to be prime minister, though he hadn't been elected and had promised to stay out of politics. With tears in his eyes, he said he would make a "sacrifice" and take the job. Two weeks later, he named his cabinet. Eleven of the "unusually rich" politicians were in it.

The machinations brought crowds onto Bangkok's streets. Thais knew a fake democracy when they saw one.

Finding myself with a free afternoon, I asked the transport desk for a car to take me to see the demonstration. As my middle-aged, uniformed, English-speaking driver and I approached and took in the magnitude of the crowd, the driver became excited. He suggested walking around with me.

He left his jacket in the car and we walked towards the edge of the mass, approaching a group of young people milling about, mostly seeming to enjoy themselves. We struck up conversations and they talked to us about why they were there. We stayed about an hour.

On the ride back, the driver was animated. Wading into that mass of Thai people, he said, had been one of the most exciting things he had ever done. This made me happy, like I had done my small piece for democracy. People who live free have a funny habit of thinking like that.

About a week later, just after dawn, Thai soldiers opened fire to disperse the crowd, which had grown increasingly restless after a month on the streets. They killed dozens of their fellow Thais, wounded hundreds more, and broke the hearts of the rest of Thailand's 60 million citizens.

I have lived and worked around Asia for 20 years, including a year in Hong Kong, and have followed the democracy protests in the city closely. There are plenty of differences between what happened in Bangkok that May and what's happening in Hong Kong - especially the absence of military involvement. But there are plenty of similarities too. And the main one is that people know a fake democracy when they see it, and don't want it.

Thailand has had numerous coups since its conversion to democracy in 1932. While the country has not been an example of political stability through the years, one thing has been constant: Thais still fight for real democracy. People who have it never want to give it up. Which is why it's hard to believe China's leaders were ever sincere about letting democracy take root in Hong Kong.

Imagine real universal suffrage coming to Hong Kong in 2017. How exactly are things supposed to work then, in 2047, when "one country, two systems" expires? Out with three decades of vibrant democracy, of people shaping their own future, and in with Beijing's one-party rule? Not likely. The democracy genie could never be put back in the bottle. China's leaders, renowned for their love of the long view, must have always known this.

Yet to placate restive Hongkongers, and to appear to keep its promises, Beijing would be OK with democracy in Hong Kong - as long as it has a revised definition. This acknowledges that people want democracy but tries to beguile them into accepting a fake.

This didn't fool anyone in poor Thailand. How was it supposed to fool rich, educated Hong Kong?

Hong Kong's young people look to the future and the future looks bleak. Hong Kong's tycoons own them. The 1 per cent are driving up property prices. Journalists are under attack. After decades of effective anti-corruption efforts, Hong Kong's people hear anti-corruption propaganda from the mainland that boasts of having snared 8,000 corrupt officials and roll their eyes - the Communist Party has 80 million members. And now China reneges on democracy, the only hope most of Hong Kong's people have to influence their own futures.

Meanwhile, that beacon of freedom, the US, looks like Exhibit A in the propagandists' case against democracy. Look at crooked Wall Street. Look at Newtown, Connecticut and Ferguson, Missouri. Look at the democratic process itself. It's a money-driven popularity contest that brings incompetent people to power and chaos to the streets.

Many of China's people are happy to be ruled for now, putting aside freedom for economic security. The freedom-loving people of Hong Kong reached that point decades ago. Many realise a rich life doesn't always mean making more money. Whither Hong Kong, they wonder. They might leave the streets, but they will never leave the idea of democracy. And they want the real thing, not a fake.

Robert Boxwell is director of the consultancy Opera Advisors

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: UN supports HK protestors!!!


British lawmakers’ trip to China cancelled amid row over Hong Kong protests debate

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 12:25pm
UPDATED : Wednesday, 26 November, 2014, 2:48am

Danny Lee [email protected]

Richard Graham spearheaded a recent Westminster debate in which he called for a probe into possible breaches by Beijing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration of which China and Britain are co-signatories. Photo: richardgraham.org

A group of British parliamentarians have cancelled a planned trip to Shanghai after Chinese embassy officials withheld the travel visa of a Conservative MP who orchestrated a recent debate on the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

Richard Graham was to due to join the trip, part of a UK-China Leadership Forum organised by the Great British China Centre, on Tuesday.

The delegation issued an ultimatum to embassy officials to grant Graham a visa by 5pm on Monday, or the trip - made every two years - would be cancelled. No visa was issued, Britain's Foreign Office confirmed.

A source familiar with the matter told the South China Morning Post that concerns were raised that the parliamentarians, flying to Shanghai via Hong Kong, could visit the Occupy Central protest camps.

Graham spearheaded a recent Westminster debate in which he called for Britain to maintain its commitments in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of which China is a co-signatory. The Guardian reported that Beijing pressured the lawmaker to make a speech in Parliament to clarify his position before pursuing a visa to enter the mainland.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "The UK-China Leadership Forum has an important role in UK-China relations. We have raised this with the Chinese government and sought an explanation of their decision to deny a visa."

Graham, the only Putonghua and Cantonese speaker in Parliament, was a Hong Kong resident when the Joint Declaration was signed in 1984 and during the handover in 1997.

Before entering politics, Graham served as a diplomat and his postings included a stint at the British embassy in Beijing.

The British parliamentarians are said to have felt Beijing was being too heavy-handed in its approach.

China's ambassador to London, Liu Xiaoming, led warnings to a committee of MPs in July not to visit Hong Kong as part of an inquiry into the Joint Declaration. However, the British Foreign Affairs Committee is on track to visit the city before the end of the year. The National People's Congress Foreign Affairs Committee also called for MPs to cancel the probe.

Graham's remarks in the debate in support of protesters and full universal suffrage angered a delegation of four Chinese embassy officials who sat in on the session, according to sources. He urged Britain not to collude with China in Hong Kong's "gradual decline".

 

[Helder Postiga]

Re: UN supports HK protestors!!!


PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 12:40pm
UPDATED : Tuesday, 25 November, 2014, 12:42pm

Million dollar question: What’s next for the Umbrella Movement?

Jason Y Ng

Split within the movement is deepening. Photo: SCMP

A week ago, a small army of masked men gathered outside the Legco Building at Admiralty in the dead of night. They were upset, so they claimed, over a copyright amendment bill that would limit the freedom of expression on the Internet. The angry men smashed a pair of glass doors at the north entrance and urged student protesters nearby to occupy the legislature. But the students didn’t heed their call. Instead, Occupy Central marshals were dispatched to block the break-in. Minutes later, police moved in with pepper spray and batons, and the men quickly fled the scene.

What appeared to be a clumsy “wreck-and-run” operation by a few agitators has ignited a political firestorm for the Umbrella Movement. Since last week’s incident, self-proclaimed “netizens” have been showing up at Admiralty in droves, challenging the student leadership and demanding that the marshal team be disbanded. Siding with the masked men, they argue that Alex Chow (周永康), Joshua Wong (黃之鋒) and their likes have gotten too comfortable sleeping in their tents, and that they and the self-appointed marshals are now standing in the way of the movement. Not since the Lung Wo Road confrontation with police a month ago have tensions at Admiralty been this high.

No one knows who the masked men and their supporters are – whether they are concerned citizens or members of nativist group Civic Passion (熱血公民) wanting their 15 minutes of fame. What we do know, however, is that there is now a protest within a protest, and a revolution within a revolution that is threatening to tear the movement apart. The emergence of a splinter group has laid bare a critical question facing the leadership: Should they raise the stakes instead of indefinitely prolonging the street occupation without a clear goal?

Indeed, the Umbrella Movement seems to have hit a plateau – or is stuck in a rut, depending on your personal views. Protesters have been camping out on the city’s major arteries for two months. Even though stories of students doing homework at makeshift libraries, recycling water bottles into handicrafts, and generating electricity on exercise bikes are all very nice, critics fear the campaign is veering off track. At some point, denizens of Umbrellaville need to wake up to the reality that occupying city streets is a means rather than an end, and that the ultimate goal is universal suffrage and not some eco-friendly utopian lifestyle. As much as some of us would like the movement to go on forever, it has to end someday, somehow.

The marshal team is increasingly under fire. Photo: SCMP

No one understands that better than the student leaders. A recent poll conducted by the University of Hong Kong found that 83 per cent of citizens wanted the students to go home. What’s more, 68 per cent would like the government to clear the sites if they don’t do so voluntarily. The rapid shift in public opinion now leaves the leadership with three options: (A) vacate, (B) negotiate, or (C) escalate.

I take no issues with Option A. In the past, I have argued that the success of Occupy Central as a post-modern political movement is measured not by tangible results but by the social awakening it brings about. On that account, the students have already achieved a great deal by arousing the youths’ interest in local politics. Packing it in at this point should not be viewed as a failure, but a chance to regroup and re-strategize. Considering how politically sensitized the city has become, Hong Kongers will be ready to re-deploy on a moment’s notice for the next chapter in our fight for democracy. These views notwithstanding, many protesters find the first option anticlimactic and even defeatist. They believe that going home now will kill both their momentum and the dwindling leverage they have over Beijing.

Turning to Option B, neither the government nor the student leadership has sat down since the 21 October talks, where both sides seemed more interested in addressing television viewers than each other. Whether we like it or not, the best way – and perhaps the only way – to break the political impasse is to talk constructively about the composition of the nomination committee as stipulated in Article 45 of the Basic Law. While that is a pragmatic solution, it also requires enormous political courage from the student leaders. Conceding to a committee-based nomination mechanic will be viewed by some protesters as a compromise on principles. And compromise, like it is in American politics, has become a dirty word in Hong Kong these days. Between paying a political price and maintaining the status quo, the leadership has so far chosen the latter.

That leaves them with Option C. As is the case for many social movements, there is nowhere to go but up. To raise the stakes, the leadership can choose from a number of classic tricks in the playbook: organise a mass hunger strike, picket government offices or take over the legislature, like the way students in Taiwan did during the Sunflower Revolution. But none of that will work unless the timing is ripe and the stars are aligned. Escalation requires careful planning, skillful execution and, most of all, a spark, like the arrest of Joshua Wong and the deployment of tear gas on 28 September that had started it all. Any attempt to up the ante without an emotional trigger to galvanize the city would end up like last week’s half-baked operation to storm the Legco Building – it will be doomed to fail.

Many have poured our hearts into the Umbrella Movement. Two months in and with the protests now showing cracks, it is time we used that other muscle we have and help the students – and they really are just students – figure out a way forward. There is no cash prize for answering the question of “what’s next,” but there is a high price to pay if we don’t.