Chill wind from Beijing
February 8th 1999 03:57
I lived in Hong Kong for 16 years until 2007. In 1998 and 1999 I wrote a series of political and social commentaries for a quirky institutional newsletter - quirky in that it was intended to be as much contentious, offbeat and humorous as it was informative. I was working as an editor, and I wrote the articles under the pseudonym Red Inque. I post them here for anyone interested in a look at life in Asia at the time, and in Hong Kong just after its return to Chinese sovereignty.
One country ...
A few years ago some wit claimed Hong Kong was preparing a reverse takeover for China. That got ‘em laughing where expatriates gathered. It remained a good joke all the way up to the handover. What with Hong Kong’s economy growing at 10% and China in a deep freeze battling inflation, it was so easy to imagine more than a grain of truth in it. Then they took Queen Elizabeth’s portrait off the wall in the General Post Office.
Red Inque had a Welsh flat-mate at the time, all mid-20s rugby-playing muscle and perfect-pitch Taffy baritone. I can recall the disbelief in his voice when he came home one evening about a week after the handover and told me the Queen’s portrait had gone. He looked like a little boy and almost choked on the words. Something at the core of him had finally realised that Hong Kong wasn’t his any more.
If there is one thing that has been consistent since, it is the perception that little has changed in Hong Kong in terms of the freedom of doing business. After initial alarm when popular favourite Anson Chan was passed over as the SAR’s first chief executive for Bejing buddy Tung Chee-hwa, days and weeks turned into months after the handover, and the hand of China, heavy or otherwise, was not to be seen. Even the Chinese garrison here seems invisible. We’ve had protests and marches and Martin Lee taunting the PRC, and the most violent law-enforcement response has been to turn up the volume on Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony. It has been business as usual (recession notwithstanding), which means non-intervention from points political.
Today, we may be seeing a change. Today, more than at any time since Hong Kong was returned to Chinese sovereignty, people are looking north and wondering. Today, as reported in The South China Morning Post’s Page 1 banner heading, we have a potential constitutional crisis on our hands.
The issue to which Beijing has apparently taken exception is a Hong Kong court ruling 10 days ago which widened the interpretation of who qualifies for right of abode in the SAR. The ruling, which caught authorities on both sides of the border by surprise, threatens an inundation from the mainland, which will create undoubted problems. But the ruling was a victory for the little guy, it was a statement of the integrity of the Hong Kong judicial system, and it was a thunderous endorsement of the rule of law and of China’s one country, two systems promise.
The ruling, it has emerged over the weekend, has met with disfavour in Beijing. Mainland ‘legal experts’ have described it as a violation of the Basic Law, as an attempt by the Court of Final Appeal to extend its jurisdiction to Beijing and turn Hong Kong into an independent political entity, and, ominously, as a challenge to the National People’s Congress, the supreme state power, according to China’s constitution.
The reaction in Hong Kong has been heated. ‘If the central government over-rules or becomes angered by it, it will lead to a constitutional crisis,’ said Democratic Party chairman Martin Lee. ‘It will be a disaster if the rule of law turns out to be the rule of man,’ said Hong Kong Bar Association chairman Ronny Tong. ‘Do we throw the Court of Final Appeal’s reputation in the litter bin simply because of one ruling they dislike? If so, the price we have to pay will be extremely high,’ said James To Kun-sun, also of the Democratic Party. ‘They are putting our judicial independence in question. How can people be convinced there will not be political intervention in our judicial system?’ said Society for Community Organisation director Ho Hei-wah.
The action of Beijing so far amounts to no more than an expression of dissatisfaction, and it remains to be seen whether it follows up with stronger words or, indeed, action. Meanwhile, imagine you are a New York or Frankfurt business owner looking to move into Asia in anticipation of economic recovery. Rents are down and you are prepared to wait for the economic barometer to go up. There’s just one decision left, where to base your operation, and last week you were still tossing up between Hong Kong and Singapore. Now?
They dream in courtship, but in wedlock wake. -- Alexander Pope
A few years ago some wit claimed Hong Kong was preparing a reverse takeover for China. That got ‘em laughing where expatriates gathered. It remained a good joke all the way up to the handover. What with Hong Kong’s economy growing at 10% and China in a deep freeze battling inflation, it was so easy to imagine more than a grain of truth in it. Then they took Queen Elizabeth’s portrait off the wall in the General Post Office.
Red Inque had a Welsh flat-mate at the time, all mid-20s rugby-playing muscle and perfect-pitch Taffy baritone. I can recall the disbelief in his voice when he came home one evening about a week after the handover and told me the Queen’s portrait had gone. He looked like a little boy and almost choked on the words. Something at the core of him had finally realised that Hong Kong wasn’t his any more.
If there is one thing that has been consistent since, it is the perception that little has changed in Hong Kong in terms of the freedom of doing business. After initial alarm when popular favourite Anson Chan was passed over as the SAR’s first chief executive for Bejing buddy Tung Chee-hwa, days and weeks turned into months after the handover, and the hand of China, heavy or otherwise, was not to be seen. Even the Chinese garrison here seems invisible. We’ve had protests and marches and Martin Lee taunting the PRC, and the most violent law-enforcement response has been to turn up the volume on Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony. It has been business as usual (recession notwithstanding), which means non-intervention from points political.
Today, we may be seeing a change. Today, more than at any time since Hong Kong was returned to Chinese sovereignty, people are looking north and wondering. Today, as reported in The South China Morning Post’s Page 1 banner heading, we have a potential constitutional crisis on our hands.
The issue to which Beijing has apparently taken exception is a Hong Kong court ruling 10 days ago which widened the interpretation of who qualifies for right of abode in the SAR. The ruling, which caught authorities on both sides of the border by surprise, threatens an inundation from the mainland, which will create undoubted problems. But the ruling was a victory for the little guy, it was a statement of the integrity of the Hong Kong judicial system, and it was a thunderous endorsement of the rule of law and of China’s one country, two systems promise.
The ruling, it has emerged over the weekend, has met with disfavour in Beijing. Mainland ‘legal experts’ have described it as a violation of the Basic Law, as an attempt by the Court of Final Appeal to extend its jurisdiction to Beijing and turn Hong Kong into an independent political entity, and, ominously, as a challenge to the National People’s Congress, the supreme state power, according to China’s constitution.
The reaction in Hong Kong has been heated. ‘If the central government over-rules or becomes angered by it, it will lead to a constitutional crisis,’ said Democratic Party chairman Martin Lee. ‘It will be a disaster if the rule of law turns out to be the rule of man,’ said Hong Kong Bar Association chairman Ronny Tong. ‘Do we throw the Court of Final Appeal’s reputation in the litter bin simply because of one ruling they dislike? If so, the price we have to pay will be extremely high,’ said James To Kun-sun, also of the Democratic Party. ‘They are putting our judicial independence in question. How can people be convinced there will not be political intervention in our judicial system?’ said Society for Community Organisation director Ho Hei-wah.
The action of Beijing so far amounts to no more than an expression of dissatisfaction, and it remains to be seen whether it follows up with stronger words or, indeed, action. Meanwhile, imagine you are a New York or Frankfurt business owner looking to move into Asia in anticipation of economic recovery. Rents are down and you are prepared to wait for the economic barometer to go up. There’s just one decision left, where to base your operation, and last week you were still tossing up between Hong Kong and Singapore. Now?
| 34 |
| Vote |
Add Comments
