Introduction: On July 1, according to the established schedule, the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to the motherland and the inauguration ceremony of the sixth government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region were held at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Center. There is no reason to change such a good system as one country, two systems, and it must be adhered to for a long time.” He also raised four points of hope.
Before July 1st, "Hong Kong 01" interviewed Chen Duanhong, a professor at Peking University Law School, to systematically summarize the past 25 years of Hong Kong. The interview was published in four articles, and this is the third article, focusing on national identity.
In Chen Duanhong's view, Article 23 legislation was originally intended to keep the bottom line, and a big mistake in Hong Kong was that the legislation of Article 23 was not completed in time.
Hong Kong 01: During the interview in 2020, you talked about the fundamental problem of Hong Kong, which is the national identity and the fundamental tearing point of society.
Some people in Hong Kong society are anti-China and anti-Communist. This root has long existed, not today. After the handover, this root has not been pulled out, and this root has grown new shoots. Under the special system, especially in education Under the system and political culture, intergenerational transmission has been achieved, and many young people have been trained to become antagonists. This is the most troublesome thing.
Taking the past 25 years as a mirror, what should we do next to strengthen our national identity?
What are the core crux and obstacles?
How to break the deep consciousness such as "hatred of the Communist Party" and "anti-China"?
Chen Duanhong, a professor at Peking University Law School, accepted an exclusive interview with Hong Kong 01, systematically summarizing the 25 years of Hong Kong's return.
(State Information Office)
Chen Duanhong: Problems like this that involve social psychology are often easy to describe but difficult to formulate.
Now when we talk about national identity, I think the most fundamental problem is institutional identity.
But when it comes to institutional identity, trouble will come, which is very contradictory.
Why "One Country, Two Systems"?
Fundamentally speaking, Hong Kong people do not agree with the socialist system very much. If Hong Kong people agree with socialism, or if Hong Kong is originally socialist, how to return may be another way.
What is national identity?
What is the country?
Land, people, history, culture, these elements are not enough to form a powerful country. A country must have a sovereign institution and a set of systems before it has strength and can act.
Without the identification of the system, it is difficult to maintain "one country", so "one country" implies a bottom-line institutional identification, that is to say, "two systems" has an implicit premise, which is the bottom line of the national system. Yes, this bottom-line recognition does not require Hong Kong to implement socialism, but it requires Hong Kong to respect the country's system and not undermine the country's socialist system.
The bottom-line identification with the state system includes many aspects, the most important being how to treat the party's leadership.
The essential feature of socialism is the leadership of the Communist Party of China, which is the fundamental principle.
The return of Hong Kong and the formulation of the Basic Law were all accomplished under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.
National identity or institutional identity cannot be achieved solely by the individual’s subjective self. The national identity of any country needs to be guaranteed by a minimum system, and some require mandatory rules.
The 23 items refer to national identity from a negative perspective. Don't think that the 23 items have nothing to do with national identity. It is an identity that guards the bottom line.
Therefore, if there are any mistakes in Hong Kong over the years, the most important thing is that the 23 legislation was not completed in time. If the 23 legislation was passed in 2003, there are norms and laws in Hong Kong, and some things will not be done. would go so extreme.
Hong Kong 01: Regarding some institutional guarantees of national identity, you mentioned the issue of residents vs citizens in "Understanding Hong Kong Politics".
Due to special historical reasons, Hong Kong has always used "Hong Kong residents" as a subject to fulfill the rights and obligations of the Basic Law, rather than "Chinese citizens". missing, or insufficient civic loyalty.
In order to strengthen institutional guarantees, is it necessary to reform the identity system?
We have proposed the concept of "Hong Kong Citizenship of China" before. What do you think of this?
Chen Duanhong: The basic law of the identity system has been written, and it is difficult to change.
It has its own reasons to use residents as the subject of its basic rights and obligations.
In addition, from the perspective of being unchanged for 50 years, it is not appropriate to make any changes.
But I think in terms of the construction of citizenship and the cultivation of citizenship awareness, there are still some things that can be done.
The central government will focus on helping Hong Kong resolve deep-seated conflicts and achieve long-term stability. Strengthening education on the Constitution and the Basic Law is the long-term work the central government will promote in Hong Kong.
(file picture)
Education issues are being discussed a lot now, especially after the National Security Law, including the education of civil servants, primary and secondary education.
Other aspects, such as the Mainland Travel Permit and International Travel Permit used in Hong Kong, are these necessary to be changed?
For example, do you need to change the name or form of your travel pass?
This is a technical issue that we need to discuss with a physical document.
Of course citizenship is not just a document, it is made up of a series of rights and obligations.
Some people have also reported that Hong Kong people seem to be subject to some special restrictions on travel in the mainland, and they want to enjoy equal treatment with mainland citizens.
Many things can be gradually improved from these specific systems and from the aspects of life, but not necessarily "in place".
Just like the household registration system in the mainland, it is also drawn one by one. It is impossible to abolish the household registration system all at once. It is too difficult.
Regarding the construction of Hong Kong's citizenship system and the reform of the resident identity system, we need to do specific work, that is, to see how many roots there are in this bundle, and analyze them one by one.
For example, on the issue of traveling to the mainland, some people have also discussed the issue of being a soldier. We can all solve it one by one.
Hong Kong 01: The difference between Hong Kong and the mainland is that it also involves the issue of "dual nationality", especially after 2019, when many people want to immigrate, causing dual nationality disputes.
We will ask, what kind of identity system should there be in order to allow Hong Kong people to have a national affiliation, local affiliation, and political loyalty?
Chen Duanhong: This is a contradiction.
There are provisions in the Nationality Law, but they are relatively tolerant to Hong Kong people. There are historical reasons for this. Some people had another passport before they returned to China.
Of course, we can't just look at it from a negative perspective. We must see that these Hong Kong people's multiple identities can actually play a positive and positive role.
If this arrangement is not good for the country at all but only bad, I think the country will take some measures.
In addition, Hong Kong people have their own preferences and may have one more choice, which is also an attitude towards life.
Do you think this will affect national identity?
From the bottom line, no matter what your identity is, you cannot commit crimes in Hong Kong that go against national interests.
There will be no particular difference at this point.
From an actual emotional point of view, people with two identities are more or less two-hearted.
From the daily life experience of ordinary people, if you have two books, you have two boats.
It is normal for ordinary people to have such judgments.
But on the other hand, you will find that a person's patriotism is actually reflected at critical moments, and it depends on how he behaves when the national crisis is at stake.
Usually good children are not necessarily so patriotic, mischievous people, but dare to charge into battle.
Patriotism is the spirit of sacrifice when it really matters.
If it were said that there were two people with books, he would not have jumped out to participate in the battle at a critical time and died for the country. It seems that it cannot be said that way.
Hong Kong 01: The resident status system is an issue left over from the Basic Law. You just mentioned that the Basic Law has already stated that it is difficult to change.
We know that the drafting of the Basic Law at that time had a certain historical background and causes, as well as compromises.
Today, in the context of the 25th anniversary of China's return to China, if we look systematically, can we start to amend the Basic Law to deal with some new situations and new problems?
Is now the right time?
Chen Duanhong: Generally speaking, I don't think it's the right time yet, but there is a point in time when we have to start the revision, that is, before the expiration of 2047, because the Basic Law has written "fifty years unchanged", and fifty years have already passed. , you also wrote "fifty years unchanged", which is meaningless.
By 2047, we expect the cause of "one country, two systems" to continue.
The Basic Law is still alive, and its provisions are about to be changed.
Even if any of the other items remain unchanged, the phrase "unchanged for fifty years" will have to be expressed in a different way.
In his speech at the inauguration ceremony, Xi Jinping pointed out that "one country, two systems" has no reason to change and must be adhered to for a long time.
(Associated Press)
This is an opportunity, and to take advantage of this opportunity, we have to do a systematic reflection.
As for the timing of the revision, I estimate that it will be completed before 2047. If we push back 5 years, it will be started in 2042, but the start in 2042 is already too late.
If it is pushed back five years, it should be 2037.
A more suitable time should be 2037 after the current government came to power, and no later than 2042.
Hong Kong 01: In the past, when people talked about the issue of national identity, they often mentioned the issue of "decolonization".
You also talked about this issue in the last interview, and believed that there is a paradox between "one country, two systems" itself and decolonization, because to keep the original way of life and the original legal system unchanged, it means that it is difficult to truly Decolonization, a lot of colonization stuff, the good and the bad are combined.
Some time ago, controversy and discussion arose around "Hong Kong was never a British colony", and how should it be understood at the 25th anniversary of the handover?
You mentioned in an article last year that Hong Kong should remove the "psychological dirt of national inferiority" left over from the British colonial rule of Hong Kong, throw away the illusion of global citizenship, and "need to get rid of 'nativism' and 'Hong Kong independence' thoughts. residual poison".
The "psychological dirt of national inferiority complex" is also part of the decolonization at the ideological and conscious level, and it is the most difficult part. How to remove it?
Chen Duanhong: There are two concepts here, one is called decolonization and the other is called decolonization.
Decolonization is from the perspective of international law. Strictly speaking, there is a specific practice in international law, but there seems to be no specific concept (I am not too sure).
Decolonization is a universal task in postcolonial societies, it is a common saying.
The decolonization of Hong Kong has already been completed. The United Nations has removed Hong Kong from the list of colonies, China has resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, and the implementation of a new constitutional system in Hong Kong means that decolonization has been completely completed, but decolonization has not been completed.
Now some textbooks still use "colonial", which actually shows that Hong Kong education has not been decolonized, and it cannot be said that it has not been decolonized.
For Hong Kong, a special feature is that after the end of colonial rule, "one country, two systems" has been implemented.
"One country, two systems" does not simply mean that the capitalist system is implemented in Hong Kong, but that the original capitalist system and way of life remain unchanged.
The original capitalism is not a few bare principles or a few norms, but a living thing.
Objectively, many elements of colonial rule are basically retained as long as they do not conflict with the Basic Law, including the ranks of civil servants and judges.
Therefore, the issue of decolonization in Hong Kong is not the same as the independence of the colonies.
This is the reason why the official documents after the handover did not formally propose that Hong Kong should be decolonized.
As for the issue of national inferiority complex, in fact, the love affair complex is the national inferiority complex, which is the collective mentality of some people.
There are three reasons for the formation of this state of mind: the first is the imagination of world citizens; the second is the worship of Western culture; the last is the religious factor.
This inferiority complex is invisible, often showing arrogance, arrogance and prejudice towards fellow citizens on the surface.
Hong Kong 01: You mentioned in "Understanding Hong Kong Politics" that "the door to universal suffrage is the door to the heart". Looking at it today, is universal suffrage still the door to the heart that unlocks the return of Hong Kong people's hearts?
Chen Duanhong: That article was mainly aimed at the political reform of the universal suffrage for the chief executive in 2017, and it was based on the background at that time.
You may all count the turning point of Hong Kong in 2019. In fact, I think this algorithm is a little inappropriate. The turning point in Hong Kong was the failure of the political reform by universal suffrage for the Chief Executive in 2017. The political reform plan was rejected in 2015.
At this point, when the disaster has not yet happened, people don't regard it as a disaster, and they will not see it until the disaster occurs, or even when it is irreversible.
2014 to 2015 is a critical juncture.
If we seize the historical opportunity, it means paving a path. There is a channel between the common people, political parties, and the government. There will be less room for radical forces, and the grievances of the common people may not be so great. So at that time I think the gate of universal suffrage is the gate of the heart.
But the door to universal suffrage was closed by the opposition, and to some extent the opposition was kidnapped by the cries of some people in society and the children of the Occupy Central, so they did Unwise choice.
After this road was blocked by them, things like 2019 appeared.
In the case of crisis and disaster, the central government took the initiative to formulate the national security law and lead the reform of the electoral system.
This is to put things right, and only in this way can we turn chaos into order.
Will the new electoral system persist for a long time?
First, it depends on whether the system is in line with the law, and second, it depends on the hearts and minds of Hong Kong people.
I wrote about Hong Kong's political system and politics in Hong Kong newspapers, and talked about the legitimacy of the new electoral system.
As for whether to open the door to universal suffrage, the door to universal suffrage in the Basic Law is not closed, and the door to universal suffrage in Articles 68 and 45 of the Basic Law is not closed.
Regarding universal suffrage, there is a question of the definition and system design of universal suffrage. What exactly is universal suffrage?
In what way is it implemented?
There are some very complicated constitutional issues here, which will not be discussed here.
The 25th Anniversary of the Return of the People’s Republic of China︱Conversation with Chen Duanhong (1): Be cautious about the inevitability of the anti-revision bill turmoil in people’s 25th anniversary of the return of China︱Conversation with Chen Duanhong (2): Confrontation is a neutral word The two places must have tension on the 25th anniversary of the return of the United States︱Rethinking colonialism: Hong Kong The 25th Anniversary of the Return of the Common Test Questions with Taiwan