Oath-taking antics: The acts that got six Hong Kong lawmakers disqualified
What the six lawmakers did during their oath-taking sessions on October 12, 2016, to get them disqualified by Mr Justice Thomas Au Hing-cheung
Nathan Law Kwun-chung
Made a short speech preceding his oath. In a reference to the government’s previous warning of potential disqualification, Law quoted Mahatma Gandhi in saying: “You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you will never imprison my mind.” As he proceeded with his oath and came to the word “republic”, he changed the tone of his voice, as if asking a question. “ I swear allegiance to ... the People’s Republic of China?” he said.
Au’s ruling: To a reasonable person, Law’s speech looked like that he did not believe in the oath, but had been forced by the system to take the oath. His changing of tone showed he did not respect or recognise China as sovereign over Hong Kong. Even if Law was telling the truth about his intentions, his oath would still be invalid as lawmakers are not allowed to convey any other messages during the oath.
Lau Siu-lai
Spent eight minutes delivering her oath, pausing five to seven seconds between every Chinese word. She later said in a Facebook post that she did that to “manifest the falsehood of the oath”.
Au: It was an “obvious case” and found she breached the requirement to believe in what she was saying. She also failed to take the oath in the exact form and content required.
Edward Yiu Chung-yim
Inserted in the middle of the oath: “I will uphold procedural justice in Hong Kong, fight for genuine universal suffrage and serve the city’s sustainable development”.
Au: Yiu “plainly” breached the exact form and content requirement, making his oath invalid. Viewed objectively, there is no doubt that he intended to add the extra words in the way that he did.