Chan Tak-leung decries superficial arguments opposition activists present to support claims that Hong Kong's autonomy is at '20-year low'

Most of Hong Kong's 7.2 million citizens anticipate the Chief Executive-designate, together with her new cabinet and administration, will bring continued stability and prosperity to the special administrative region but a small group of die-hard "democrats" are trying their level best to present a totally different picture to the world. The small delegation that went to the United States and used the Senate as a platform for their political ends by alleging that Hong Kong's autonomy is, and I quote, "at a 20-year low".

In order to give credit to their allegations an article headlined "Stand Up for Democracy in Hong Kong" was written and published in the New York Times. It quoted three incidents to demonstrate how democracy has deteriorated in the SAR in order to prove their point. One was the failed promotion of a "pro-democracy" scholar to a senior post at Hong Kong University. The second was the disappearance of five booksellers and the third the disqualifications of opposition lawmakers and rounding up of "democracy" activists.

After reading the article, one would suggest that a more appropriate title for the article should be "How to Make a Mockery of Democracy in Hong Kong" for it definitely does not promote democracy in the SAR.

Are these so-called democratic activists really serious? Are they so pre-occupied with "politics" and their "anti-China" sentiments that they have lost all sense of reality? Do they really believe that these naive and flimsy cases will be enough to persuade US senators to re-introduce the "Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act"?

Not in the least would certainly be the answer to all these questions.

To begin with, anyone with some understanding of human resources would know that only the employer or appointment committee constituted by the responsible organization can make decisions on appointments, senior or otherwise, regardless of external political influences. Furthermore, appointments have to follow strict guidelines in assessing whether candidates have the required essential and desirable qualities and attributes to perform the task, not merely by the reputation of the applicant.

In relation to the so-called "missing booksellers", is it not true that one of them is actually a member of the delegation appearing in front of senators in the US - the Land of the Free? As for the legal proceedings surrounding the democratically elected lawmakers - would Capitol Hill accept their oath-taking as sincere and genuine if they were shown the video on how these lawmakers demonstrated their total disrespect to the legal requirements and solemnity of the occasion. At the same time, despite the fact that a banning order was in force the lawmakers decided to behave irresponsibly toward others whose duties were to uphold the rule of law by forcing their way into the legislature. Had they forgotten that democracy and freedom are for all citizens of Hong Kong, not for a privileged few?

One needs to be reminded of two undisputed facts emerging from the "cases" quoted in the article. First, the three incidents involved no more than a handful of individuals among Hong Kong's 7.2 million citizens and second, deploying words like "freedom", "autonomy" and "political" in order to wiggle their way out of legal and criminal responsibilities will not wash at all.

Under the "One Country, Two Systems" principle and the Basic Law, all SAR citizens should have the same rights as those who claimed to be democrats but nonetheless flagrantly and repetitively ignored the rule of law and abused the independent judiciary system that is there to uphold democracy.

Even in citizenship ceremonies in the United Kingdom, new citizens will be required to either swear that they will be "faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen" or to pledge and "give their loyalties to the United Kingdom and respect its rights and freedoms". Likewise all members of the UK's parliament who will be elected in the general election next month will be required to take oaths before assuming office, including words that they "will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law."

To stand up for democracy is not something granted to people who make the loudest noise. Every citizen in the SAR has the same right to see, hear and speak democracy, provided they are doing it "according to law". If elected lawbreakers in the SAR think they are above the law, the sooner they are disqualified, the better. "Democratic" activists in Hong Kong need to understand that others have their democratic rights and freedoms as well; any infringement of the rights and freedoms of others will incur punishment.

In less than two months' time, Hong Kong's Chief Executive-designate will take office together with her new leading team and a refreshed Executive Council. In order to take the SAR up one level, the new CE must design and promote channels for the majority of the SAR citizens to exercise their freedoms and articulate the democratic environment that they are experiencing. Their collective contributions will certainly challenge those "political elites" who think that they are above the law every time they claim they are standing up for democracy. The fact is they are not.

(HK Edition 05/08/2017 page9)