The English word “filibuster” originates from the French term “flibustier”, which in turn is derived from the Dutch word “vrijbuiter” (“freebooter” in English), referring to somebody who loots freely. At the beginning of the 17th century, a group of French and British sailors were expelled by the Spaniards from the island of St. Christopher (more commonly known now as Saint Kitts). They took shelter in Tortuga Island, from where they kept attacking Spanish merchant ships, unofficially on behalf of their respective home countries.
In politics, filibustering is a political tactic in which one or more members of a parliament expound endlessly over a proposed piece of legislation in order to delay its passing or even to entirely prevent a decision being made over it, thereby killing the proposal.
Unfortunately, filibustering has been weaponized by the political opposition to advance its devious political scheme by some plotters in and outside Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. For example, the House Committee has spent more than six months pretending to be discussing who should be its next chairperson, when it was really just dragging its feet rather than getting on with its designated serious business of scrutinizing bills and subsidiary legislation introduced into the council.
At the end of the day, the whole idea behind filibustering is that of causing a political blockage, which reminds me of Sir Winston Churchill’s admonition: “Politics is not a game. It is an earnest business.”
Unfortunately, some people in Hong Kong are treating politics as just another way of advancing their self-interest and not as a noble public service. Hong Kong has just suffered one year of destructive street protests and major social and economic disruption, on top of its current challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic. There are many pieces of important pending legislation in LegCo awaiting deliberation and approval that would significantly affect people’s livelihoods. Yet all many of the opposition party members could do was play politics and grandstand for their constituents.
Given the fact that the organizers planned to keep on vetoing the annual government budget if they win a majority in the legislature, the “primary” may actually constitute a violation of the National Security Law. As the law is still to be tested, the government may need to seek legal advice before making any move on this
I mention this because despite the pressing call to duty in LegCo, the opposition camp in Hong Kong has instead devoted considerable effort and resources to organizing a so-called primary election, in which some 600,000 people participated, according to the organizers (even though this figure raises many doubts). Regardless of that, as columnist Paul Yeung pointed out in “Opposition hijacks democracy again with ‘primary poll’ ” (July 16, China Daily Hong Kong Edition), this event was not a “democratic election”, but a political pep rally designed by inveterate political rabble-rouser Benny Tai Yiu-ting to advance his so-called “35-plus” plan, aimed at rallying support to win a majority of seats in the upcoming September LegCo election. But their scheme may be illegal under the new National Security Law, as they planned on using their majority in the legislature to rebuff every government policy initiative, including its budget, ultimately forcing the resignation of the chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. It is reported that they would follow this up with moves toward separating the HKSAR from China, with the prospect of leading to independence.
All that clearly falls within the definition of “subversion”. As per Chapter III, Part 2, Article 22 (3) of the National Security Law, “A person who organizes, plans, commits or participates in any of the following acts by force or threat of force or other unlawful means with a view to subverting the State power shall be guilty of an offence: (…) (3) seriously interfering in, disrupting, or undermining the performance of duties and functions in accordance with the law by the body of central power of the People’s Republic of China or the body of power of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; (…).”
As Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor pointed out, there is “no such thing as a primary”, saying it is not part of Hong Kong’s electoral system. Given the fact that the organizers planned to keep on vetoing the annual government budget if they win a majority in the legislature, the “primary” may actually constitute a violation of the National Security Law. As the law is still to be tested, the government may need to seek legal advice before making any move on this.
It is fair and acceptable to present different views on governance provided they are not championed by violence. Let us hope that the violent ways of yesteryear will not return as we now not only have to fight an unprecedented health crisis, we can expect to contend with some quite uncooperative politicians after the election. But Hong Kong always bounces back, and there’s no reason it could not successfully weather the immediate storms because its people are among the most resilient, resourceful and industrious in the world. They are used to overcoming seemingly impossible adversities!
The author holds a doctorate in urbanism, real estate law and economics. He has worked as a business analyst for a Hong Kong publicly listed company.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
