editorial
Written by: Hong Kong 01
2020-06-01 06:00
Last update date: 2020-06-01 06:00Last Thursday (May 28), the National People's Congress decided to authorize the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress to formulate the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law", reflecting that legislation is imperative and that it will not be disturbed by threats from some American politicians. In fact, one of the main reasons for the central government's eagerness to fill the loopholes in Hong Kong's national security is the comprehensive confrontation between China and the United States. The more the United States intervenes in Hong Kong affairs, the more likely it will be to support the central government's vigilance against its intervention in Hong Kong affairs. However, it is undeniable that the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law" has indeed caused many Hong Kong people to worry. The Central Authorities, in addition to Article 23 of the Basic Law, took the initiative to legislate against four types of crimes, such as splitting the country, subverting state power, terrorist activities, and external intervention. Many citizens are worried about weakening Hong Kong's "high degree of autonomy". The legislative decision to propose that the central government will set up an organization in the SAR "as needed" to maintain national security is also questioned as the same as moving the mainland's governance to Hong Kong.
In the short term, the central legislation will indeed have a negative impact on Hong Kong's "high degree of autonomy". Some politicians even described the "one country, two systems" as dead. We do not agree with this conclusion, nor do we think that unconstructive populist abuse will help the situation. Some pan-ministers have claimed that the NPC has passed the Hong Kong legislature to carry out legislation, but it does not respect the Hong Kong Legislative Council. We hope that these Members have some respect for the IQ of the people of Hong Kong-the Central Government has shown that Article 23 legislation of the Basic Law is at risk of being put on hold for a long time, and understands that everyone knows who is obstructing Article 23 legislation before it causes the Central Government to take the initiative to change Hong Kong ’s national security. How can the situation of not being fortified in the field pass the Central People's Government and destroy Hong Kong's "high degree of autonomy"?
Even if it is a political dispute, the truth still has to be said. "High degree of autonomy" is not a high wall that separates Hong Kong from the mainland, and fulfilling constitutional responsibilities under the "one country" principle is an indispensable element for maintaining autonomy. "Hong Kong 01" has always advocated that Hong Kong society seek consensus as soon as possible and complete 23 pieces of legislation. We regret that Hong Kong has failed to abide by its role and evolved into the central government formulating national security laws for Hong Kong. We will actively provide opinions for the legislative process, and hope that this time the legislation will be successfully completed, just as the Central Government enacted the Basic Law for Hong Kong for the first time. We also hope that representatives of all political constituencies will actively face and actively propose, rather than complaining about themselves.
(Profile picture / photo by Yu Junliang)
Proactive legislation tests the central government's understanding of the two systems
The central government ’s initiative to enact national security laws for Hong Kong is a major test for the success of “one country, two systems” —if Hong Kong does not enact legislation for Article 23, Hong Kong people lack an understanding of “one country” in “one country, two systems,” then the “Hong Kong version of the national security law” "It is whether the central government accurately understands the" big test "of the" two systems. " As long as it is properly handled and can achieve the same effect as the enactment of the Basic Law, then the legislation of the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law" is to perfect and consolidate the "one country, two systems" and to provide a positive demonstration for handling the contradictions between central and Hong Kong in the future.
Maintaining "one country, two systems" is a consensus between the Central Government and Hong Kong society, but for a long time, each other has been familiar with and familiar with this system. Everyone knows that it was a special measure adopted by the central government at that time to understand that Hong Kong people had their own way of life before they returned, understand Hong Kong people's inadaptation to the mainland system, and to allay Hong Kong people's concerns about the return. We all know that the Central Government has enacted the Basic Law by amending the Constitution, authorizing Hong Kong to adopt a system different from that of the Mainland. This is the "two systems." However, few people fully understand why it is "one country, two systems", especially the meaning of "one country". In fact, "One Country" exemplifies the essence of Hong Kong's return and confirms the transformation of Hong Kong from a British colony to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.
In the course of daily government operations and social operations, how to effectively implement "one country, two systems" is a political lesson that the central government and Hong Kong must explore together. Some people think that they hold the "Book of Heaven" in their hands, and they can tell how to practice "one country, two systems".
How to effectively implement "one country, two systems" is a political lesson that the central government and Hong Kong must explore together. (Profile picture)
Duanbenzhengyuan's ostrich mentality cannibalize autonomy
Why did the pan-Political Party in Hong Kong still insist on "one country, two systems", but the central government severely criticized its challenge and contempt for "one country, two systems"? This is an issue that all Hong Kong people should ponder. We sincerely believe that the vast majority of pan-democratic politicians and political parties do agree with "one country, two systems", but the facts lie ahead. They have not respected the fundamental principle of "one country", and their political actions have ignored national security and national dignity. This factor. The central government has long been aware of this, but even so, it did not intervene strongly, and even waited for 23 years. During this period, various things happened in Hong Kong that seriously challenged the dignity of the country. The central government still did not force the Hong Kong government to deal with it severely. As a sovereign government and a unitary system of government, allowing Hong Kong to use different political, economic, and social systems is a test in itself. This time the central government formulates the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law" for Hong Kong. To participate in the "one country, two systems" test again.
Similarly, the return of Hong Kong is not a multiple choice question, but a necessity of law, reason and emotion. The withdrawal of Britain from Hong Kong in 1997 was not so much an initiative as it was that the Chinese government adopted this arrangement in consideration of the geopolitical situation and history. Hong Kong people remembered how Mrs. Dazzle "down" the stairs of the Great Hall of the People. After the reunification, the implementation of "one country, two systems" was not for the British to fight back for Hong Kong. Hong Kong people should never think that they can rely on the "colonial sovereign state" to give orders, have the right to exhaust, and even naively think that they can call the central government and let it go. I thought that holding the British and American flags would force the central government to whisper.
Hong Kong is no longer a colony. We should try our best to strive for the greatest autonomy and development space for Hong Kong, but this does not mean that we should play a game with the central government in governing Hong Kong, but work with the central government to improve and consolidate Hong Kong. "One country, two systems" has allowed this system to gradually mature and become stable.
In the anti-revision movement, some demonstrators fought against the British flag of Hong Kong during the colonial period. (Profile picture / Reuters)
Actively face the biggest convention of rebuilding central port
Why does the central government make national security laws for Hong Kong this time? Since it has been waiting for 23 years, why can't it wait? The key is the word "wait". If you just wait, it is not a problem. However, Hong Kong people know that it is actually an indefinite wait. I believe that even members of the Pan-Democratic Legislative Council cannot determine how long to wait. As for members of the formed faction, although they have enough votes to complete the legislation, they dare not make a commitment because of lack of political energy. The Hong Kong Government has been implementing this blameless task for many years. When Hong Kong has an empty institutional framework but it cannot function effectively, it is no wonder that the central government has determined that the Hong Kong government and legislature have not fulfilled their constitutional responsibilities and have not undertaken the fundamental obligation of "one country, two systems." This legislation is to make up for the lack of work in Hong Kong's "one system."
Why does the central government enact a national security law for Hong Kong cause social anxiety? This also stems from the reason why Hong Kong adopts "one country, two systems"-Hong Kong people lack confidence in the legal and political systems in the Mainland. If this mentality is completely unreasonable, the central government would not design "one country, two systems" for Hong Kong to appease the people. In this case, the central government should continue to uphold this understanding and continue to use the "one country, two systems" principle to formulate the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law" for Hong Kong. As long as the central government upholds the same attitudes, methods and procedures as those enacted in the "Basic Law" that year, it can achieve results acceptable to Hong Kong people, and once again proves to Hong Kong people that the central government can better understand what "one country, two systems" is.
If the formulation of the "Hong Kong version of the National Security Law" tests whether the central government still understands how to legislate for Hong Kong under the principle of "one country, two systems", then in the past 23 years, Hong Kong has failed to legislate for national security by itself because the Hong Kong society refused to "take the test" It shows that Hong Kong's political elites have no commitment, and they have no confidence in whether they can succeed in enacting national security legislation based on "one country, two systems."
Although we are equally anxious, we still have confidence in the central government's legislation this time, because we firmly believe that maintaining "one country, two systems" is the greatest common divisor of the different classes of the central and Hong Kong society. Thirty years ago, the Basic Law formulated by the Central Government for Hong Kong was supported by the vast majority of Hong Kong people, including pan-democratic parties. In the process of formulating the Basic Law, Hong Kong has a positive and supportive attitude towards its eventual implementation. We do not think that the implementation of the Basic Law in the past 23 years has failed. Otherwise, why has no one proposed to amend or even cancel the Basic Law today? This time the Central Government has no choice but to formulate a national security law for Hong Kong. We believe that everyone should be bold and careful and actively face it. Taking a step back and saying that wincing doesn't make any sense, anxiety can't change reality at all.
[01 Weekly Editorial] Hong Kong should reflect on how to benefit "one country, two systems"
Read more weekly articles:【01 Weekly News Page】
Please pay attention to the 216th "Hong Kong 01" weekly newspaper published on June 1, which is available at major newsstands, OK convenience stores and Vango convenience stores.
You can also subscribe to the weekly report here to read more in-depth reports.
Hong Kong version of the Basic Law of the National Security Law 23 Articles 2020 Two Meetings 01 Weekly Editorial