The decision by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to clarify the eligibility of members of the Legislative Council serves to strengthen the principle of patriots governing Hong Kong from a legal perspective. Following that, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor announced the SAR government would proceed with local legislation of Article 104 of the Basic Law to make it a legal requirement for all civil servants but particularly public officeholders to “swear to uphold the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and swear allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China”.
Public reaction to the above-mentioned development in Hong Kong politics has been mixed, with the overwhelming majority supporting the unseating of four opposition lawmakers who had already been disqualified by returning officers from running in the seventh-term LegCo Election next year. Not surprisingly, some people expressed objection to the NPCSC decision, saying many Hong Kong residents still opposed to the country’s political system and the governing party are supporters of the four disqualified opposition lawmakers, which means the NPCSC decision practically ignored if not quashed those people’s wishes. Indeed, some political organizations and figures opposed to the country’s political system and the governing party have their supporter bases as a result of Hong Kong’s colonial past. Since the British-Hong Kong administration introduced limited LegCo seats returned by direct votes in geographical constituencies in 1991, the practice has been maintained for 29 years and counting. The last exercise was the sixth-term LegCo Election in 2016, when half of the LegCo seats were returned by direct votes from geographical constituencies, with the opposition camp retaining its “critical minority” of more than one-third of the total. This phenomenon was mainly the result of British rule before China resumed the exercise of sovereign rule over Hong Kong and local residents need time to know the motherland well enough to change their biased minds. Today Hong Kong remains separated from the mainland by a physical boundary, which also helps fortify the ideological “wall” for some Hong Kong residents to hide behind. That “wall” cannot be torn down overnight.
In the wake of the SARS epidemic in spring 2003, the Hong Kong SAR signed the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) with the central government in June that year. Since then economic integration between Hong Kong and the mainland quickly gained traction and became an inexorable trend. Today, integrating its own development into the overall development strategy of the country is without question the only way for Hong Kong to survive and thrive in the fast-changing world. Against this backdrop, it is easy to understand why opposition parties and figures are losing their foothold in the political establishment and why Hong Kong must be governed by genuine patriots.
The only way to tell if a political party or personality is pro-progress or anti-progress is which side of history they stand on — whether they contribute to or obstruct Hong Kong’s healthy development — from a historical perspective. So far, the opposition camp as a whole has been opposed to and trying to stop Hong Kong from integrating its own development into the overall development strategy of the nation; whereas the patriotic camp has been promoting and supporting it. That is what sets the two sides apart.
In the early years of the HKSAR (since July 1, 1997) the central government was quite tolerant toward opposition parties and personalities in general, hence many of them having won LegCo and/or district council elections on anti-government platforms over the years, mainly because they did not “cross the line” by advocating “self-determination” or Hong Kong independence then. In those years the central government arranged mainland tours for LegCo members and many opposition lawmakers took part in them. Their representatives also got to meet with leading officials from central government departments concerned. It was hoped that at least some of the opposition members would gradually change their attitude toward the motherland from negative to positive. Even after the “Occupy Central” illegal movement in fall 2014, which all opposition parties played prominent roles in, Beijing still treated the “pan-democrats” as somewhat different from the separatist radical groups that emerged during “Occupy Central”. However, the “pan-democrats” chose to join forces with separatist radical groups wholeheartedly as the anti-extradition law amendment bill protests descended into an all-out anti-China and anti-CPC campaign called “black revolution” last year and officially became pawns of the US-led anti-China clique. That year-long criminal campaign left the central authorities no choice but to promulgate the National Security Law for Hong Kong and adopt a clear-cut political standard on the opposition camp as a whole. To quote Zhang Xiaoming, deputy-director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, in his speech at a forum of top legal experts on Nov 17, “Hong Kong can be governed only by those who love the nation as well as Hong Kong; while those opposed to the central government and obsessed with messing up the HKSAR must be shut out of public office.”
The “pan-democrats” evolved from advocating “true democracy” to pursuing “Hong Kong independence” with separatist radical groups because they share the desire to subvert the sovereign state and political system of the country. That is no longer a matter of ideological differences but a political cause actually in motion. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for the HKSAR government as well as the central authorities to plug statutory loopholes and take political measures to set things straight by correcting wrongs in the HKSAR establishment. Naturally some Hong Kong residents who still support “burn-together” advocates would feel upset and angry when the latter are kicked out of public offices. In other words, in order to improve Hong Kong’s political eco-system, it is necessary to not only rid the establishment of separatists but also help local residents who still support them see through their lies and bigotry for the sake of Hong Kong society. To do so, the SAR government is obligated to educate members of the public about the nation’s Constitution, the Basic Law of the HKSAR and the National Security Law by any means necessary. At the same time, the SAR government should do its best helping as many people as possible to understand that all attempts to subvert the sovereign state and achieve Hong Kong independence are doomed to fail because they can never turn time backward.
The task of improving Hong Kong’s political eco-system also rests on the shoulders of patriots from all walks of life for obvious reasons. The positions of power, such as LegCo and district council seats, left by disqualified “burn-together” advocates must be filled by patriots through due process, or they might be taken by separatists pretending to uphold the Basic Law and pledge, fingers crossed in their minds, allegiance to the HKSAR.
Also necessary is for the CE and her team of principal officials to elevate their governing prowess to a higher standard. It is hoped that Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor will put forward new, exciting policies reflecting the expectations conveyed by Vice-Premier Han Zheng on behalf of the central government during his meeting with Lam in Beijing on Nov 6.
The author is a senior research fellow of China Everbright Holdings.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
