by Lam Pun Lee

On June 12 last year, despite more than one million Hong Kong people took to the streets to protest against the extradition bill, Chief Executive Carrie Lam insisted on resuming its second reading debate. This in turn triggered tens of thousands of people, mainly the young among them, to surround the Legislative Council(LegCo) building in order to block lawmakers from debating the bill. As some tried to storm the premises, the police fired more than 200 rounds of tear gas in response. The converging attack of the police caused chaos among protesters, almost sparking a terrible stampede. In fact, the amount of tear gas used drastically exceeded the 87 rounds used on September 28, 2014, the first day of the Occupy Central Protest. This marks an unwanted new page in the history of protest in Hong Kong.

Beyond a doubt, Lam is the culprit of it all. Ever since she became an accountable principle official, she has achieved nothing except making empty promises. Back in 2014, as the Chief Secretary for Administration, she was assigned with the task of reforming the political system. Obviously, it was a complete failure as not a bit of progress was made in bringing universal suffrage to the election of the Chief Executive, something clearly outlined in Article 45 of the Basic Law. What’s more, this led to serious social cleavages and deterioration of the relation between the police and the general public.

What makes Lam more contemptuous is her lack of integrity. Disguising herself as a desireless person, she kept hiding her political ambitions. In October, 2015, she made the infamous claim about herself that “a desireless official will become daring”. It proves to be plainly false. If she had been desireless, she would not have run for the Chief Executive post about a year later, breaking her promise of retiring and staying with her family in Britain. Meanwhile, if she had been daring, she would not have just oppressed the young and turned a blind eye to police brutality and the collusion among the government, business sector, rural forces and triad. It is indeed ridiculous that recently, Nip Tak-kuen, Secretary for Civil Service Bureau, has publicly requested the civil servants to pledge loyalty to the Chief Executive, who herself has no integrity at all.

During the Chief Executive Election in 2017, one of the candidates, Tsang Chun-wah, pointed out that Lam was nothing more than a “C Y 2.0” and “Tearing-up 2.0”. In view of the damages Lam has brought to the Hong Kong society, Tsang’s statements carry much truth. In the wake of the Occupy Protest of 2014 and the Mongkok Riot of 2016, instead of seeking a reconciliation and a rebuild of trust, Lam chose to go the opposite way by further suppressing the democratic lawmakers and social movement activists, disqualifying them in the LegCo and subsequent elections, and even sending some of them to jail. Believing she gained the upper hand, Lam tried to use the murder case in Taiwan as an excuse to force through the extradition bill, thereby dragging Hong Kong to an unprecedented crisis.

In reality, the public was not concerned too much about the extradition bill until the nomination of the LegCo bill committee chairman turned into complete chaos and the government unfairly granted exemptions to a privileged few. And when the government chose to insist on pushing the bill through even though Taiwan publicly rejected to accept such form of extradition of the murder suspect, the public finally came to a sudden realization that there was a conspired objective behind. The protest quickly gathered momentum and the situation started to escalate thereafter.

By then, there was still leeway for turning back though. If Lam had withdrawn the bill at that moment, such incidents as 6.12, 7.12 and 8.31 might not have happened at all. And there would not have been more than 9,000 people being arrested, most of them youngsters and students who were deliberately targeted by the police. In fact, among them there were professionals such as doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers and pilots. And a lot of the arrested students were from universities and reputable colleges, performing excellently in their respective studies. To the ruling class, what they should ponder are: Why did these promising youngsters choose the approach of violent protest at the expense of their bright futures? And why was the once “peaceful, rational and non-violent” way no longer an option?

In retrospect, from the May Forth Movement, Anti-Japanese Demonstrations, Cultural Revolution, 1967 Riot, 1989 Democracy Movement to the Occupy Protest, the young and the students have always been at the forefront. It is sad to see their passion exploited and future sacrificed for the sake of political ambitions and power struggles. The ruling few have never rethought profoundly and made meaningful change in the political system. Now, as usual, Lam and the privileged few have tried to explain the youngsters’ protest was a result of the sedition of the “black hands” in behind. So, who actually are “the black hands” ? If there is nothing to hide, why do we not just set up an Independent Committee of Inquiry to find them out?

If the public wants the truth, they must take initiative in the LegCo election in September and vote for the candidates who really represent their voice and interests. Only then is there a real chance to invoke the “LegCo Power and Privileges Ordinance” for setting up an Independent Commission of Inquiry into the extradition incident. Only then will it all come out in the wash.

---------------------------------
Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app
To know more: https://bit.ly/2yMMfQE
Apple Daily mobile app latest version DOWNLOAD NOW