Beijing’s mouthpieces in Hong Kong took the city’s judicial system to task for a whole week after Chief Executive Carrie Lam said there was “no separation of powers” between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

Since Sept. 5, the Chinese-language newspapers Tai Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po have been on full throttle criticizing the courts, judges and even the Department of Justice for seven days in a row.

The intention was to force the judicial system to accept that Hong Kong’s government was “executive-led,” according to a commentator who was familiar with mainland Chinese affairs and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The maelstrom began on Aug. 31 when Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung defended the government’s latest review of school textbooks, in which the phrase “separation of powers” was deleted from content on Hong Kong politics.

Lam lent support to her education chief by saying on Sept. 1 that separation of powers did not exist in the city’s executive-led political system. She said the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution, stated that the Chief Executive was the leader of the city and government and that her power was authorized by the central government in Beijing.

The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office followed up the controversy, saying on Sept. 7 that the Chief Executive was in a “leading and core” position in the establishment and operation of the regime structure. As the head of the entire Hong Kong, the Chief Executive was responsible to the central government and enjoyed extensive powers, the statement said.

Apart from the official responses, two pro-Beijing propaganda organs in the media also weighed in. Tai Kung Pao fired the opening salvo with a front-page interview of the retired permanent judge at the Court of Final Appeal, Henry Litton. It ran a headline saying the court was disabling the governance of the Chief Executive.

Meanwhile, Wen Wei Po reported on the views of Hong Kong delegates to the National People’s Congress that refuted the notion about “separation of powers.”

The attacks grew specific and personal later in the week. Pulling no punches, both newspapers tore into Magistrate Stanley Ho for handing down “light sentences” to convicted rioters while enjoying a career promotion. Tai Kung Pao also lambasted the judiciary for not publicizing a talk about judicial fairness and public confidence held on July 3.

Ho was later transferred to the High Court to take up an administrative post that would not adjudicate in criminal cases.

Pro-Beijing lawmaker Holden Chow joined the fray, urging the Department of Justice to investigate if one of their prosecutors had encouraged colleagues to attend the June 4 candlelight vigil this year to mark the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown in Beijing.

A commentator who spoke to Apple Daily said the Communist Party of China had never recognized an independent judiciary, so it would be a top priority for the party to attenuate such a feature in Hong Kong so as to enforce its comprehensive governance over the city.

The propaganda campaign against the judiciary was intended to put across the message that the judiciary would need to find its place in the executive-led system and receive instruction from the central government, he said. He was worried that this series of attacks could pave the way for an exclusion of foreign judges from the local legal system.

The commentator warned that the loss of an independent judiciary could jeopardize the global economic position of Hong Kong. “Beijing should weigh the benefits against the costs,” he said.

Click here for Chinese version

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play