OPINION - Politics
The Lion Rock Spirit of Law On October 6th, the HKSAR government opted for a ‘nuclear option’, imposing the Emergency Regulations Ordinance (ERO) to quell four months of massive anti-establishment protests. This colonial-era law, last used 50 years ago, allows the administration to green-light legislation proposals without passing the legislative council. While Carrie Lam claims that it is exclusively used to one particular case – banning protesters from wearing face masks to ease identification, critics and opposition concerns are sound – the ERO can pass regulations including censorship, arrest, detention and others, on the basis that the executive “may consider desirable in the public interest.” A pandora’s box of potential human rights violations has been opened. More fundamentally, this executive move blatantly undermines the Basic Law. Article 39 provides that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights will continue to apply in Hong Kong after 1997. Article 73 vests the legislative power of Hong Kong in the Legislative Council. Article 8 says that any laws previously in force that contravene the Basic Law cannot be maintained. These provisions are nullified when the ERO is invoked. Furthermore, usurping the lawmaking function of the Legislative Council and passing it to the executive alone, is highly 16
problematic. When the executive can override institutional safeguards, a detrimental trend of unchecked power could ensue. While the Hong Kong high courts have ruled the mask ban as unconstitutional, such trends of authoritarianism is precisely what protesters, and to a larger extent ordinary citizens, are concerned about when it comes to Rule of Law.
excuses of crime” and support the government and the police force in “defending and strengthening the authority of the law”. When Han Zheng, Beijing’s top official for Hong Kong affairs, met Carrie Lam he remarked “the most important task for Hong Kong right now is to stop the violence and restore order”, noting that it is “the common responsibility of Hong Kong’s executive, legislature and judiciary”. This emphasis on obedience and compliance sums up our HKSAR administration and Chinese government’s conception of Rule of Law. Evidently, it is strictly linked to abidance to authority and maintaining social order in the Chinese view.
Meanwhile, when protesters stormed and vandalized the legislative council on the eve of Hong Kong’s handover anniversary on July 1, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman accused protesters of “trampling on the rule of law” and denounced protesters for placing themselves above the law. With that, Xinhua emphasized the need to “reject
Lately, it seems as if the Rule of Law existed in two parallels. In many ways, this differing conception of Rule of Law demonstrates the ideological division between the ‘yellow’ and ‘blue’ side. Whereas the prodemocratic side emphasizes on ensuring the government powers are kept in check – the proestablishment side emphasises
