A Hong Kong court on Tuesday ruled to disqualify two pro-independence lawmakers, a week after Beijing said it would not allow the pair to be sworn into office as fears grow of the city’s liberties coming under threat.
Baggio Leung, 30, and Yau Wai-ching, 25, deliberately misread their oaths of office, inserted expletives and draped themselves with “Hong Kong is not China” flags during a swearing-in ceremony last month, prompting a judicial review into their future as legislators.
“Mr Leung and Ms Yau have been disqualified from assuming and have vacated the office of a member of the Legislative Council,” judge Thomas Au said in a written judgement.
“The oaths purportedly taken by Mr Leung and Ms Yau on October 12 2016 … are invalid and void and have no legal effect,” Au said.
The High Court’s decision was preempted by Beijing’s ruling last week, saying that any oath taker who does not follow the prescribed wording of the oath, “or takes the oath in a manner which is not sincere or not solemn”, should be disqualified.
That move was slammed by pro-democracy activists and legal experts as a massive blow to Hong Kong’s judicial independence and sparked demonstrations from both pro-Beijing and pro-independence groups.
Ahead of the court ruling, the city’s leader called for zero-tolerance against activists pushing for independence from China.
“Those who are advocating for independence and other forms of splitting from the country are a small minority but I cannot lower my guard and cannot (give them) any tolerance,” Leung Chung-ying told Xinhua Monday.
“Members of the Hong Kong independence (movement) cannot appear in the political system,” Leung said.
Hong Kong was handed back to China by Britain in 1997 under a “one country, two systems” deal which protects its freedoms for 50 years, but there are growing concerns those liberties are disappearing.
Chinese do have their fair share of scum. Just look at his adopted western name! What a retard; his ancestors will turn in their grave.
So now you realise what a disservice you have done to the people who voted for you. You have left them voiceless with your reckless and western inspired dissent.
I stopped reading doom and gloom articles about China’s economy from the so-called experts especially Gordan Chang. They have been saying this for the last 10 years. Perhaps eventually they will be right. Much like saying you will die, in 100 years.
For using the Japanese insult term refering to China and all Chinese in their official oath, these two scums deserve much worse.
How these idiots who proposed a return to British rule be labelled as pro independent baffle me. Same with those fascists who disallow teaching of Chinese side of history in school but insisted that discussion of independent is a form of free speech labelled as pro Democrat in the press. I really hope Trump administration stop financing all these nonsense in the press.
A good decision and upholds the sanctity of the law and the legislature. The alternative is anarchy.
The two idi*ts deserve it!
No need to respond to him. Repost him.
China begins to elect legislators at grass-roots level.
Over 14,000 deputies of the people’s congresses at the county and township level would be elected in Beijing, China Radio International reported.
Deputies at the county and township levels, which constitute over 90 percent of legislators at all levels nationwide, are elected directly while legislators above the county level will be elected by the people’s congresses at the lower level, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
Once again western media does not cover these elections in China. Western media has no credibility and most are merely propaganda hack outlets.
These two were really lucky that they were not cited for contempt in their use of expletives as well as their refusal to take their oath of office as required under the law.
Contempt in the ‘face of the legislative council’ would have landed them in jail until they were purged of it by way of an apology or by some other suitable punishment.
The US has a higher prisoner population per capita, with nearly 700 per 100,000 population, for a figure of about 2.2 million prisoners.
Frankly, this is a bloody disgrace, especially as many of these are in jail for non-violent, or drug possession charges and are refused the right to vote, even once they have finished their time.
Officially, China’s per capita incaceration rate is around 120 per 100,000 people, for a figure of about 1.65 million. However, once all of China’s prisoners are taken into account, including those held in detention, rather than prisons, the total number of Chinese prisoners is likely to exceed the number of US ones, with an estimate of at least 2.3 million prisoners.
With respect to the number of executions, in 2014, the US carried out 35, while China carried out over 1000.
The problem, as with statistic that comes out of China is that it is very difficult to know exactly what is going on, because freedom of information is regarded as a dangerous idea by the communist party.
So, while the US system is corrupted by the War on Drug Users and racial minorities, along with a private prison system that makes its money by maximising prison populations, the Chinese system is corrupted by a damn near non-existent rule of law and the intense politicisation of its justice system.
Irrespective of their political views (which, given the totalitarian nature of the Chinese Government, am very much in sympathy with), I can’t see this kind of behaviour being acceptable in any country.
Taking the oath of office is fairly much accepted as being a pre-requisite to being allowed to carry out the responsibilties of the office. Although, having said this, given the propensity of politicians to lie, I suspect that these two would have been much more open, honest and forthright members of the Legistlative Council than most of the others.
As far as Leung Chung-ying saying that he can’t give these people any tolerance, he is like every other intolerant, hateful fat cat, sitting on his perch afraid that someone, or something is going to knock him off.
Frankly, if the people of Hong Kong want independance, then the people of Hong Kong should be allowed independance and supporters of this position should be tolerated just as much as those who wish to remain within the Chinese orbit.
To expand on what you’ve said I have taken the liberty of setting out the following:
MATTHEW JAMISON , PUBLISHED IN STRATEGIC CULTURE ON 31/10/2016
How the Chinese Democratic Model Works
Matthew Jamison is a Senior Parliamentary Researcher at the House of Commons. He holds two degrees from Cambridge University
“China for example is not some monolithic communist totalitarian dictatorship as some misguided and prejudiced individuals in the West have attempted to caricature it. It’s Parliament, the National People’s Congress, is not dominated by a single party – the Chinese Communist Party – there are indeed other political parties beside the CPC allowed in the National People’s Congress and they have a consultative and amending role within the legislative process. The Communist Government regularly accepts amendments made to it’s legislative programme of government from other parties. There is also the fact that there are multiple and competing factions and differing wings within the ruling Communist Party itself, ergo even the Chinese Communist Party is not a monolithic entity.
The Chinese political system prizes above all social and economic stability which is the foundation for building the good society and is based on the Confucian principles of striving for ever greater harmony rather than competition which inevitably leads to conflict. There is a massive amount of public consultation undertaken in China with various mechanisms available for the public to give input into the policy making, legislative and political system. There are even elections in China at the local level which shapes the composition of the National People’s Congress. Chinese citizens have what are known as Local People’s Congresses, akin to American State legislatures or local councils in Britain. The Local People’s Congresses are subject to elections with a choice of different candidates vying for election. Those candidates which are elected to the Local People’s Congress will then go on to have a role in the selection procedure for candidates for the National People’s Congress.
So, even within what some ignorant and hostile Western critics call a “totalitarian dictatorship” there are democratic elections. And for a supposed dictatorship there are strict term limits placed on how long the President and the standing committee of the Politburo can hold power, for only ten years, and then an orderly leadership transfer occurs, unlike in Britain which has no term limits on how long a Head of Government can serve (in theory a Prime Minister could carry on for as long as they liked conditional on the support of their party members and the voters).
…..Perhaps the West could learn from the Chinese «consultative democracy» especially after the year of Brexit and Trump.”