Chris Patten is concerned for Hong Kong freedoms, but must reckon with the rights record of the British Empire

I refer to Chris Patten’s letter dated June 27, wherein he criticised the use of the Public Order Ordinance to imprison young activist Edward Leung Tin-kei (“Chris Patten: Hong Kong should not use public order law to curb freedoms”).

Patten had earlier criticised then justice secretary Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung for having sought a judicial review on student activists. Patten again spoke up when Edward Leung was sentenced, saying this was in direct contravention of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In both the above instances, the student activists had crossed the line: participated in activities that could have resulted in deaths. Hong Kong, even today, is a safe society, one where people value elements of peace and order. No matter what their personal beliefs or what they claim to stand for, society and the judiciary cannot and should not condone acts which contravene peace and order in society.

Speaking of history, the Public Order Ordinance, the usage of which is condemned in his letter, was instated by the British government during the riots of 1967.