The opposition activists barred from running in the September Legislative Council election have only themselves to blame, given their unscrupulous acts to destabilize Hong Kong, legal experts and political analysts said.
Calling the returning officers’ move to invalidate the nominations of 12 aspiring candidates standing for LegCo election “fair and legitimate”, they said the decision was made after comprehensively taking into account the candidates’ past words and deeds.
The returning officers made the proper decision, as the candidates’ previous conduct could not guarantee that they would faithfully uphold the Basic Law
Lawrence Ma Yan-kwok
chairman of the Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation
The returning officers ruled that the candidates could not be sincere in their promise to uphold the Basic Law — the fundamental constitutional duty of lawmakers — in view of their past behavior.
Lawrence Ma Yan-kwok, chairman of the Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation, told China Daily that the returning officers made the proper decision, as the candidates’ previous conduct makes it hard to believe that they would faithfully uphold the Basic Law.
ALSO READ: HK bars 12 activists from standing for LegCo race
Such acts include advocating Hong Kong independence, vowing to indiscriminately veto government proposals after being elected, and refusing to recognize the nation’s exercise of sovereignty over the Hong Kong SAR.
Ma stressed that the Basic Law is the pivotal document that lays out the political structure of the HKSAR. When a nominee does not fit the legal criteria laid out in this document, they are not qualified for office, he said.
Law professor Willy Fu Kin-chi, vice-chairman of the Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation, said the disqualifications were fair, as they were supported by solid facts and evidence.
Although some candidates claimed they have given up radical political advocacy, such claims in fact have little credibility, considering the candidates’ consistent adherence to their radical positions.
Veteran political scholar Lau Siu-kai, vice-president of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies, said the disqualification was the result of the opposition’s increasingly radical political approach.
In recent years, some opposition politicians’ positions appear to have become more and more extreme, such as condoning violence, colluding with foreign and external forces, and seeking acts of secession, Lau said.
Such acts were even seen in some incumbent lawmakers, who have sworn allegiance to the SAR and have a great responsibility for a society’s well-being, he said.
Paul Yeung Wan, a political researcher, agrees with Lau that the opposition camp must pay for its previous wrongdoings.
The central government did offer opportunities to them, but they ignored them, so they should suffer the consequences, Yeung said.
He hopes that in the long term, the opposition camp can learn a lesson from this experience and adjust its political positions.
READ MORE: LegCo nominees disqualified by own behavior
Senior Counsel and Executive Councilor Ronny Tong Ka-wah held that the disqualification of so many candidates showed that many people’s understanding of the “one country, two systems” principle is not in line with the Basic Law, reflecting an “unhealthy political ecology”.
Expressing support of the government’s adherence of electoral principles in such an environment, Tong said that requiring candidates to respect constitutional order and national sovereignty is a common practice in every country.
Dismissing accusations that the central government has tightened the “political red line” by the move, he said that more and more people are testing and crossing the line.
