Carrie Lam needs to buy time on extradition bill
- The alternative for Hong Kong’s leader is to ram the unpopular bill through the legislature and risk facing the wrath of the public
Our lawmakers have turned into pugilists like their legislative counterparts in Taiwan. Given the way Hong Kong has been heading in recent years, what’s surprising is that it has taken them so long.
Rival pro-government and opposition camps clashed at the weekend in the Legislative Council over the government’s contentious extradition bill.
One side says the bill is needed to prevent Hong Kong from becoming a haven for fugitives. The other side says its hidden intention is for mainland China to go after dissidents or otherwise innocent people.
At least one legislator has been hospitalised, while three others claim injuries. Resistance is growing within the community against the bill, while foreign business bodies and governments have joined the chorus.
It’s hard not to see similarities with the mass opposition in 2003 that forced the government to give up legislating against subversion, sedition and treason under Article 23 of the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution. That sorry episode led to the resignation of the security minister and ultimately the chief executive. Of all the crises and controversies, this one has now become the most threatening to the city’s leader, Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, since she took power less than two years ago.
Both sides have been surprised by the scale of the public opposition, especially since a mass rally about two weeks ago. The opposition had, until recently, been so demoralised it was ready merely to demand changes to the bill, rather than scuppering it. Now, to the government’s dismay, it has been re-energised.
At the weekend, the fight was over the chairmanship of the bills committee – which will scrutinise the extradition bill – and the legal validity of its meetings. But, regardless of the technical legal arguments, the opposition has found an effective way to delay the bill’s passage.
In an official statement, the government said: “We are gravely concerned that if this situation continues, it would have an adverse impact on the scrutiny of the bill in Legco.”
Lam has a decision to make. She can ram the bill through Legco before its summer recess and risk facing the wrath of the public, something she has avoided so far, unlike her unpopular predecessor. Or she can buy time, let the opposition stall and then blame it for the delay.
Clearly, the government needs more time to re-strategise and to address public anxieties and anger.
