Occupy Central supporters should beware the risks of breaking the law
Lai Tung-kwok says Hongkongers who choose to occupy Central should consider the consequences of breaking the law and their safety, as law enforcement officers will take robust action to ensure public order
With the launch of the constitutional reform consultation, "Occupy Central" has aroused wide public concern. According to the Ci Hai Chinese dictionary, the meaning of "occupy" is to forcibly take possession of geographic space; to forcibly take control of a territory or a position. The word "occupy" has important implications for the debate over legality and whether it will affect people's life, social order, and the normal operation of the financial, industrial and commercial sectors, including the hotel and tourism businesses, the financial stability of our economy and local and foreign investment.
As the secretary for security, I have the responsibility to explain clearly to the public the nature of the "Occupy Central" movement and its impact.
In the article "The most lethal weapon of civil disobedience", published in January last year in the Hong Kong Economic Journal, University of Hong Kong associate law professor Benny Tai Yiu-ting advocated the use of non-violent action and civil disobedience to fight for democracy. Up to 10,000 protesters will be unlawfully mustered to block the main roads in Central in a bid to paralyse the political and commercial heart of the city with the aim of forcing the central government to accede to their demands.
The proposal has gained the support of Chinese University associate professor Chan Kin-man and Reverend Chu Yiu-ming, a standing committee member of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China.
It appears that many people in Hong Kong still do not understand clearly whether "Occupy Central" is an unlawful act and whether the organisers will be able to control the assembled people and ensure they follow their self-proclaimed principles of non-violence and "bearing legal liability". Also, they have not fully considered the consequences of paralysing our political and commercial hub.
Tai noted that "Occupy Central" is a weapon with mass "disruption power". The act, he said, should comply with certain principles, including the following: