• Fri
  • Oct 31, 2014
  • Updated: 5:11pm
Beijing White Paper 2014
NewsHong Kong

Former justice minister defends white paper, warns city will be 'doomed' if it engages in 'colour revolution'

Ex-justice minister says she understands why central government is concerned over meddling in city and warns against any 'colour revolution'

PUBLISHED : Sunday, 15 June, 2014, 6:58pm
UPDATED : Monday, 16 June, 2014, 8:43am

Beijing is concerned about the possibility of external forces at work in Hong Kong and the city would be "doomed if a 'colour revolution' takes place", a former justice minister warned yesterday.

Elsie Leung Oi-sie, now deputy director of the Basic Law Committee under the National People's Congress, defended central government against pan-democrats' criticism that it had reneged on its promise to allow the city a high level of autonomy.

Leung spoke out in the wake of controversy surrounding a white paper stressing Beijing's control over Hong Kong under the "one country, two systems" policy.

In the paper, Beijing warned that national security would be jeopardised if Hong Kong was not ruled by "patriots".

"The central government is worried about the country's situation," Leung said on Commercial Radio. "Hong Kong is such a free city, and many non-residents can [engage in] activities here, so [the white paper] says we have to stay vigilant about whether external forces are meddling in Hong Kong's internal affairs.

"Hong Kong would be doomed if we engaged in a 'colour revolution'; in fact, intense movements have been on the rise recently, and I think [Beijing's] worries are not groundless."

Colour revolutions, so called because the organisers would use a particular colour to signify their movement, took place in eastern Europe in the early 2000s.

Leung did not elaborate on why Hong Kong might go down a similar path, but she is understood to be targeting the Occupy Central campaign, which threatens to mobilise 10,000 people to block traffic in the financial hub as a last push for democracy.

She reiterated her worry that the Occupy plan would end in violence - but rejected concerns that military force would be exerted on the civil disobedience action, as happened at Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989.

"Some people are very scared that the [Chinese] army would repeat the political upheaval of June 4 - but it won't. The local garrison would [be mobilised] only if the SAR government asked the central government for help, and then it would be limited to the purpose of maintain public order," Leung said, citing Article 14 of the Basic Law.

Occupy organiser Benny Tai Yiu-ting said worries about subversion were similarly unfounded. The movement "has never challenged the country's sovereignty" nor the "one country, two systems" policy, he said.

"We have never tried to [engage in] subversion … We are only fighting for genuine universal suffrage," Tai told the RTHK show, City Forum.

The debates about the white paper and electoral reform also drew a response from Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah.

In his blog, Tsang wrote that the white paper was "released mainly because the central government needed to give a comprehensive statement, as a minority of the people have a vague and one-sided understanding of the Basic Law".

"It was not modifying its policy on Hong Kong," he added.

Tsang also wrote that he hoped people could fully express their opinions on reform, as that would be "the first step" to achieving consensus. Democratisation would bring a "fundamental change to Hong Kong's governance, and it has great implications" for the city and for China as a whole, he wrote.


Related topics

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Meritocracy sounds great, on paper. Until you actually think about how merit is determined, and who makes the determination. In the CCP system, it is the political equivalent of religious creationism, and if you trace it back to the beginning, you discover that the "god" figure was Mao, since by definition he was the first one of merit, and he set in motion the process whereby those who followed have been deemed to have merit. Then it all makes sense, cuz the CCP bootlickers all seem to have this amusing deference to Mao and seek to place him on some deity pedestal, including the dude below.
But the funny thing about CCP meritocracy is that those who supposedly have merit are very reticent to have that merit judged by the people they govern. Now, part of that is human nature. Who would want to face the music when they have the option of not doing so? So the CCP system is great at circling the wagons and protecting its own (except when it purposely doesn't want to, of course, like exhibits Xilai/Bo among others).
The CCP's recent economic track record is indeed great. But that follows 30 years of ****. When one governance system can oversee both good times and crappy ones, the logical conclusion is that it wasn't causally responsible for either. That aptly summarizes the necessity of the CCP system moving forward. Of course, i recognize practitioners of the CCP religion are impervious to logic. So I expect more rapture-like predictions from the usual suspects.
Arguably the world's greatest scientist and philosopher ever lived, Einstein had this to say about truth: "A law of nature is expected to hold true...it is given up (when)..one conclusion is incompatible with a single experiment."
Across space-time since US Independence, selecting leaders by elections has proven more failure than success in this global village. Then why are Democracy proselytizers jamming this myth down our Chinese throat?
On matters of governance, experimentation guided by meritocracy seems the only plausible approach at present. China's and HK's -- in recent past -- track records look great so far.
Of course, falsifiability in science suggests China's ascension will be followed by ineluctable decline like all random processes in history. How sustainable is her rise? No one knows.
HK had a good thing going till Asian financial crisis. Self-hate bananas insist on Greater China following a proven self-destruct path of failed and dysfunctional democracies into the political black hole horizon.
Brainwashed fanatics live on faith and we, on reason, science and experiments. But nut cases will use violence to deter meritocratic governance.
I am a banana with a predominant Western education. Great as Einstein, I keep in mind all his blunders, i.e., the cosmological constant and with him on the wrong side of debates in Friedman's universe, EPR paradox, black hole, etc.
It's the Einstein's spirit I wish China and HK would follow.
whymak and req,
Edith Roosevelt’s remark is seldom appropriate
except for rare cases like this:
“if they had our brains, they’d have our place”
Given the discrepancy in knowledge, intellect, perspective, motive, …
it’s only right that we ignore what is noise and not voice
from such an incompatible place
if your goal was to come across like a single-celled organism, then congrats, you've done it!
whymak has never shied away from baseless and unsubstantiated broad-strokes attacks on people who disagree with him, but his June 16 9:31PM effort is one unusually angry rant even by his depraved standards. It never ceases to amuse and amaze me how these guys feel the need to conjure up entire psychosocial and socioeconomic backgrounds for people about whom he knows nothing, simply because he requires straw-men at whom he can throw his daggers for folks having the temerity to disagree with his tightly held religious beliefs about the CCP.
Me, I couldn't care less who whymak is, what he is, or how uneducated or closed-minded he might be. It is simply sufficient to mock the stuff he says, since he provides plenty of fodder. But if he feels the need to play amateur psychologist, he is welcome to, the better for our collective amusement.
"I, a member of the better than 2 to 1 Silent Majority"
---LOL. The other thing with these guys is their penchant for grabbing stats seemingly out of their backsides. Either that, or they quote highly flawed Pew surveys when the results suit them. Instead, I'd direct him (again) to the HK Transition project, if he actually wants to know how the "silent majority" feels. However, I suspect it is more soothing for him to simply hold to his religious beliefs, as is his right.
So he knows of many "riot-minded" and "subversive" HKers. His imagination is certainly a creative thing. But I'm afraid he's progressively losing touch with reality.
Go get a life you creep. The flaw with democracy is that lower life forms get more representation. Also the loud mob minority makes too much noise and ought to be canned.
It is even more interesting to look at the lip battling between the central government and pan-democrats.
On one hand, it is always the cliche for Beijing to say the external forces are acting against the stability of Hong Kong, which nobody in the world would believe.
On the other hand, pan-democrats reiterates Hongkongers should be totally independent from Beijing. Otherwise, citizens in the territory would lose self-esteem and be slaves of China. Wait a minute. Under a circumstance that Water, food, electricity, daily necessities and business opportunities are from China, is it necessary to fight heads-on with Beijing? Or is that more advisable to sit together on the negotiation table?
But ...by the way, as Hong Kong people are mostly pragmatic creatures and they have a set of idea in their minds. Let us look forward to the coming Occupy Central Campaign which is a good chance to show the opinions of citizens over the topic of political reform. After the event, both Central Government and pan-democrats would gain a more complete picture on the public opinion of the city.
For the ibankers working in Central, perhaps a good chance for you to rest for a few days and take an overseas trip!
hard times !
This nasty guy with a username of 'whymak' came from prestigious college: St.Joseph's yet he is shameless and shameful enough to serve as a blind loyalist by defending the autocratic ruling regime in the north of our border---the CCP government which never allows any type of democracy ! The promised universal suffrage will turn out as a faked one as our chief executive in 2017 will have to be chosen among a bunch of chosen candidates who are favoured by Beijing authorities !
Go for peace demonstration HK, No aggressive, No harm, cause aggressive will always lose, just like Tiananmen Square on June 4, whole world are reject of this behavior, only cave man doing this, kill, harm, evil, that is why u (CN) lose in the world of love, peace, human right, freedom, no one will standing in u side of communist, u fault, and u will fail again... ... ... HK people 7 miljoen, go for peace peace peace demonstration, u will win with peace, go for write, talk, commerce, tv, social media, donation some organization who want collaborate with u as demoncratie peace human, etc... With peace, U fight for u human right! Remember: NO aggressive, NEVER aggressive, REJECT aggressive, even they try to lure u, the whole world are watching now! Freedom of speech...
Your criticism of me speaks clearly your persona. Just for once, I will waste a few minutes.
People without use of reason, knowledge in science and sentential logic want debates. How do you debate morons speaking only in undefined sanctimonious slogans, God, Democracy, human rights, universal values and all that jazz?
I believe in free speech for peers, from whose debates I frequently find faults with my arguments. It's a nonstarter with dingbat Anson Chan and Jesus freak Benny Tai turkey talk about "True Democracy."
What is the point of arguing with Democracy Cultists who have never read American Founding Fathers' Federalist Papers, let alone philosophers like Kant, Locke and Hume? Do you know the meaning of a unitary state as compared with a federation, when Basic Law was copiously discussed in fairly unambiguous terms during the days of Changeover?
In order not to rile up riot-minded HKers, all these years Beijing has adopted a policy of don't-ask-don't-tell with regard to the true meaning of high degree of autonomy. Now subversives, emboldened by US and UK politicians and diplomats sleazy “reminder” to Beijing on upholding its end of the deal, are staging a last gasp push to destabilize HK government and our economy. They have pushed Beijing to assert its prerogatives.
Hkers better than I should govern. I, a member of the better than 2 to 1 Silent Majority, refuse to accept Democracy Cult's Thai yellow shirt tactic to hijack government.




SCMP.com Account