Beijing rolls back civil rights in Hong Kong

August 13, 1997
Issue 

By Eva Cheng

After failing to stop the limited democratisation of Hong Kong's political order in the territory's final colonial years, Beijing threatened to roll back those changes after it took control on July 1. It has been doing that over the last month.

However, not many have expected it to trample so soon on Hong Kong's post-return constitution — the Basic Law — which was created under its thumb.

Hong Kong's legal foundation hung in the balance in the last days of July while two barristers challenged the legality of Beijing's hand-picked "provisional legislature".

The Basic Law, finalised seven years ago, sets down Hong Kong's first post-return legislature, spelling out the different component parts of its limited franchise. But it did not authorise the formation of a provisional legislature.

Having failed to block the June 1994 decision of Hong Kong's partially elected legislature to put all of its seats to the vote in 1995 — some with restrictive constituencies that discriminated against working people — a furious Beijing announced in August 1994 that it would dismantle the 1995 legislature when it took over.

A provisional legislature was formed across the border in 1996 and assumed power on July 1. Beijing promised an elected legislature around May 1998.

The two barristers who challenged the provisional legislature argued that the body was formed without a legal basis and should be dismantled, a demand also raised by various pro-democracy groups.

However, in its July 29 ruling, the Court of Appeal refused to face the real issue, which it was empowered to do under the Basic Law. The judges said they could not challenge the decision of the Chinese parliament.

They defined their task as only to decide whether that parliament had authorised the formation of the provisional body, which they decided it had. The ruling could still be challenged in the Court of Final Appeal.

Beijing also trampled on the Basic Law at the expense of 66,000 children in China. These children, mostly with one parent who is a permanent resident of Hong Kong, have the "right of abode" in post-July 1 Hong Kong under the Basic Law.

But the Tung Chee-Hwa government now denies their rights, under the pretext of a strain on social services and "in the interest of existing residents". The claim that a government with HK$330 billion of reserves is not capable of providing these children with basic services is a sick joke.

The children's only legal option is to join the long queue of mainland Chinese waiting to come to Hong Kong. With a maximum of 150 admitted a day, it is a wait of up to 40 years at present. Who can come and when under that list is Beijing's decision, not Hong Kong's.

Bribery can speed things up, but most of them could not afford it.

Desperate parents smuggled many of the children to Hong Kong, but those who came forward after July 1 to claim residency are facing repatriation.

Many are appealing the repatriation order and have applied for legal aid. But Rita Fan Hsu Lai-Tai, president of the provisional legislature, wonders "whether it might be a waste of public resources".

Grassroots organisations are now helping these children in their fight. About 100 lawyers have offered to represent them free if they fail to get legal aid. The concern is that this disregard for the Basic Law could be extended.

On July 16, the provisional legislature suspended four laws that provided workers with minimal rights. Together with three other laws, they were passed by the pre-July 1 legislature in its final sittings.

Three less controversial laws — allowing compensation payment for deafness, May 1 as a public holiday and protection of the harbour from further reclamation — were "saved" by public protests.

But the other four — on workers' rights to collective bargaining on salaries and perks, a relaxation of restrictions on unions' use of their funds, prevention of anti-union discrimination by bosses and widening the Bill of Rights — were suspended, pending a review due for completion in late October.

About 60 grassroots activists and unionists protested against the suspension on July 9, followed by a five-day hunger strike by Lee Chuek-Yan, ousted Democrat legislator and president of the Confederation of Trade Unions, which has 43 independent unions as members.

About 400 joined a rally on July 13, followed by another hunger strike by unionist Leung Yiu-chung, which lasted three days.

Armed with 13,000 signatures opposing the suspension, more than 200 pro-democracy activists and unionists protested while the provisional legislature was in session on July 16.

Scuffles erupted when protesters from the April 5th Action group tried to break through the police barricade blocking them from the legislative building. Three managed to get into the building and began shouting slogans, but were arrested. One of them, Leung Kwok-Hung, was ordered to report to the police on August 28.

On July 20, about 30 people, led by Leung and other April 5th members, protested at China's Foreign Ministry office in Hong Kong in support of the 100,000 workers in Sichuan, who protested when the three state firms they worked for went broke. Police barred the protesters from getting close to the building.

In mid-July, the Executive Council issued a guideline banning protests in Hong Kong which advocate independence for Taiwan or Tibet.

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.