當年今日
關於我們

Imposed ‘patriotism’ reveals wolf-like nature | Alan Leong Kah-kit

蘋果日報 2020/12/06 10:23


Under Article 104 of the Basic Law, persons taking up public office, including the Chief Executive, principal officials, members of the Executive Council, members of the Legislative Council (LegCo), judges of the courts at all levels, and other members of the judiciary, must swear to uphold the Basic Law and swear allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR. After the Hong Kong National Security Law came into effect on Jul 1 this year, it became immediately effective that public officials must also take the same oath under Article 6.
Who are public officials? The SAR government stated that it is still under consideration, but it has already required all new civil servants who have been employed since Jul 1 this year to take an oath. As for other civil servants in active service, common sense infers that there will be no exemption. The Chief Executive Carrie Lam clearly stated that the scope of public officials who need to take an oath is broader than under Article 104 of the Basic Law. Whether or not it covers members of government-funded institutions and those whose duties are to exercise public powers has not been finalized.
In other words, public officials may be broadly defined to include all faculty, teachers and staff of universities, secondary schools, and elementary schools, and employees of voluntary agencies that receive government subsidies, as well as statutory bodies, the MTR Corporation, the Airport Authority, and so on, with unlimited extension.
What are the consequences for refusing to take the oath or being deemed to have violated it? According to the current “Oaths and Declarations Ordinance,” the cost of violating oaths is that those who are active in service will be dismissed and those who have not taken up their posts will be disqualified. Obviously, in the eyes of the regime, simply not being appointed as a civil servant, being disqualified from running for office, being disqualified from serving as a member of the legislature, and the like are too lenient. There must be a stronger deterrent to punish those who are “unsupportive and unloyal” or, collectively referred to as “unpatriotic.”
In this year’s policy address, Carrie Lam quoted the interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) in November 2016. She stated that “The taking of the oath is a legal pledge made by public officers to the People’s Republic of China and the HKSAR, and is legally binding.” She also predicted that the government will introduce a bill within this year to amend local laws such as the “Oaths and Declarations Ordinance” and the “Legislative Council Ordinance” in order “to enhance the oath-taking arrangements and to deal with those who have engaged in conduct that breaches the oath after swearing-in as well as the legal consequences and the relevant statutory procedures involved.” Carrie Lam is confident any draconian law that will have to go through LegCo’s mechanical review can be passed without difficulty.
Who has the authority to rule that a public official does not support the Basic Law or is not loyal to the Hong Kong SAR? Are the consequences writing letters of remorse, fines, jail time, or extradition to China in the name of national security even without local judicial involvement? Will an anti-government social media post or a lapel pin on a uniform become a crime? Should all the people monitor and report each other? What are the objective criteria for support and allegiance? It is absurd enough that the Returning Officer now has the power to judge the sincerity of a person’s oath of office and the right to decide whether the person is qualified to run for public office. In the future, the rule of man may become even more relevant and important in the oath-taking legislation for public officials.
Recently, regardless of issues such as oaths, Executive-LegCo relationship, and amendments to the “Prevention of Bribery Ordinance,” Carrie Lam always complacently emphasized her constitutional status and supremacy as the chief executive, giving off the air of a flamboyant imperial robe. At present, members of the LegCo are sworn in by the president, but Carrie Lam hinted that the chief executive will administer the oath in the future. Whether it is the president of LegCo or the chief executive who will administer the oath, it does not affect the appointment of members, but the mentality behind the change is to highlight the symbolic significance of the legislature serving the executive.
The use of oaths to create white terror, making public officials live their lives in fear of being snitched on, distrusting each other, not daring to speak the truth, and afraid of stepping on landmines. Consistent with the style of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), these tactics are not about solving problems but solving the people who raised the problem.
It has been more than 23 years since the handover. In the early stage, the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, the Liaison Office, the state media, and the NPCSC had mainly fought against those who “opposed China and stirred up troubles in Hong Kong” by means of smearing campaigns, which had not been very effective. Particularly, against the elected legislators who won in the legitimate elections, the regime lacks effective means to disarm them. Step by step as we progressed to the present day, they have revealed their aggressive wolf-like nature through indiscriminate arrests, bans on elections, national education, and the sinicization of the media. This is a clear demonstration of the central government’s full authority over Hong Kong as declared in the 2014 White Paper on the practice of the one country, two systems. On the surface, the CCP has a firm grip on the 7 million people and creates the illusion of patriotism and love for the party. Replacing the Lion Rock with the Five Fingers Mountain is not a solution to the deeply-rooted conflict that the people’s hearts will not return.
(Alan Leong Kah-kit is the chairman of the Civic Party.)
Click here for Chinese version
We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]
Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.
The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.
---------------------------------
Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE
To download the latest version,
Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play