New laws unlikely to stamp out racial prejudice
YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE for love. Even with the most noble of intentions, it is impossible to pass laws forcing people to like each other. Sad, but true, and something that needs to be remembered as Hong Kong considers legislation aimed at combatting racism.
Are such laws needed? Yes. Can they work? Maybe. Will they make a difference? I doubt it. Rather than putting more books in lawyers' libraries, we should be thinking of education rather than legislation.
It is sad that in the 21st century in a city that takes pride in its cosmopolitan population and international outlook that we even need to think about laws against racial prejudice. Such problems shouldn't exist, but they do.
Rather than animosity, we have ingrained ignorance, with unthinking prejudices passed down from parents. It is in schools rather than courts that we should seek a cure.
It is a real problem, directed mostly against Filipinos, Indians and other people with dark skin. By and large, Caucasians are either exempt from racist sneers, ignore them or fail to realise they are targets. But is the intolerance and mistrust strictly based on race? Mainlanders are also victims of sneers and prejudice.
Anti-discrimination laws now cover bias against sex, disability and family status. Many people would like to see these extended to cover racial prejudice. The Government has been adamant that racism in Hong Kong is virtually non-existent and has been reluctant to budge. There are now welcome signs this is changing.
The way in which some Hong Kongers treat their foreign domestic helpers has been sickeningly highlighted in recent court cases. But is this racism or is it, equally disgracefully, arrogant feudalism?
Whatever the reason, if a person burns someone with an iron as punishment, it is the act of a horrible human being. Will laws against racism have any real effect in such cases? We already have laws that offer protection in extreme cases. If you torture someone, you can go to jail, and it matters little whether you do it because you are a callous beast or a racist fool.
Some Wan Chai bars restrict the entry of ethnic minorities. This sort of tawdry behaviour is revolting. It is precisely the kind of complaint that legislation could tackle. But how do you prove it?
The Hong Kong Against Racial Discrimination (Hard) coalition realises laws cannot deal with rudeness and unfriendly attitudes. It argues that legislation provides some protection and remedy where there are blatant cases of people being denied jobs or apartments, for instance, because of race.
Hard has asked the United Nations to press the Government to act on anti-discrimination laws. But it agrees that comprehensive education is also needed.
No one can deny that tacit racial bias exists in Hong Kong. It is often unexpressed, lurking under the surface of society. It is fed by arrogant assumptions of superiority. It is expressed in rude treatment, bad service and insulting remarks uttered in Cantonese on the assumption that the target cannot understand.
It is difficult for me to grasp how anti-racist laws could be written, and how offences could be investigated and prosecuted. What of such controversial issues as jobs. Would the politically correct straitjacket be applied so that an employer is not allowed to specify age, sex, race or sexual preference when advertising for staff? Can't a person hire whom he or she wants?
Common decency demands racial harmony in Hong Kong. Will legislation achieve this? Hopefully, yes. Realistically, I doubt it.
Kevin Sinclair is a Hong Kong-based journalist
