Letters to the Editor
(SCMP). March 4th, 2016
A trifecta of crass
ignorance, intellectual dishonesty, and grand-standing for Alex Lo and Michael Chugani
in Marchst 1st pages of the SCMP.
Lo asks: “But how does
becoming a city state shield us from “mainlandisation”, when we are already a kind
of a city state, with our own border control, separate law, taxation, government,
currency and international representation?”
Because then Hong Kong wouldn’t be accountable to Bejing, would be on the fast-track to Democracy, and would be able to ensure that the values it cherishes and that have made it what it is today (the rule-of-law, independent judiciary, freedom-of-the-press, respect of private property and initiative, etc…) would be enshrined in a constitution that is not the product of a dictatorship.
Because then Hong Kong wouldn’t be accountable to Bejing, would be on the fast-track to Democracy, and would be able to ensure that the values it cherishes and that have made it what it is today (the rule-of-law, independent judiciary, freedom-of-the-press, respect of private property and initiative, etc…) would be enshrined in a constitution that is not the product of a dictatorship.
A few pages later, Michael
Chugani’s piece “Just imagine an independent Hong Kong” gets the prize for
ridiculous; I understand he tries to be cynical (funny?) with his story-line
reversal but it is such a fabulation that it loses any relevance. An
independent Hong Kong would buy food, water and welcome visitors the same way
it is doing now. We could in fact argue that it would get better quality
version of all of them from somewhere else!
Actually, mainland China already tried to impose Putonghua, has shown
numerous times that it will crush protests, and has little regards for the
rule-of-law… no need to wait for 2025.
Luckily, Mike Rowse has
brought some clarity (and sanity) to the rule-of-law debate on his 28th
of February article titled “Hong Kong’s rule of law is safe from street rioters”
where he rightly explains the concept as “the legal principle that law should
govern a community, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions of
individual officials”. Or simply, that everyone is equal before the law (no
matter what Mr. C.Y. Leung might say). It can actually be read as such,
straight from the Hong Kong’s Department of Justice’s publications and website
(go have a look!).
I invite Hong Kongers to
study the struggle for democracy, its essential pillars, its progress and
achievements in the last few hundred years and contrast it with the outcomes of
one-party systems.
I invite Mr. Chugani, and
Lo to reflect on what is going to happen in 2047, once “One country, two
systems” is no-more…
JC Clement
Tai Kok Tsui
