Letters | Why Hong Kong is not London of 2011: protesters here have clear political aims and wide community support

Carrie Lam’s comparison of the social unrest in the two cities is off the mark, but should not stop her from learning a lesson from the past: policing by water cannon does not work

Hong Kong protests

Letters

Published: 6:45am, 3 Dec 2019

Why you can trust SCMP

Dear Carrie Lam,

I am very pleased to hear that you remain committed to a public dialogue. Perhaps you can organise meetings with each of the new district councillors in the next few days; they have been very active in reaching out to all sectors of society recently, and they are unlikely to be fired for expressing a political opinion.

However, I’m worried by your comparison of our situation to the 2011 Tottenham riots, and your plan to set up an independent review committee. You do understand that a review is not an inquiry?

I lived in Wood Green before moving to Hong Kong; seeing the streets of my former home in chaos saddened me. The riots in the UK had very different characteristics to Hong Kong’s situation. Lasting only about six nights, and initially triggered by the police shooting a man dead, the disturbances devolved into looting and arson and spread to cities across the UK.

Firefighters were attacked by rioters. Theresa May, home secretary at the time, rejected the use of water cannon: “The way we police in Britain is not through use of water cannon. The way we police in Britain is through consent of communities.”

The rioters did not settle on a set of demands or manifesto; they were not a political force and were not supported by local communities. Police violence did not escalate. Every one of these is a contrast to our social unrest.

To find the causes of our social unrest, look at the protesters’ five demands, and dig into the concerns behind them. The peaceful mass protests at the beginning and the peaceful election landslide on November 24 clearly demonstrate strong support for the political aims throughout society.

Perhaps the most important lesson you could learn from looking at the Tottenham riots is the success of policing through consent of communities.

Allan Dyer, Wong Chuk Hang

Police need reminder on consent and accountability

Amid all the news and comment about the Hong Kong police in the last few months, two vitally important points have been largely ignored. Firstly, the police are there to do a job for the people of Hong Kong, as are doctors, teachers, road cleaners, etc. They are employees, not masters.

Our chief executive made what some would call a Freudian slip of the tongue when she referred to them as her colleagues. Their salaries and funding come from the public purse, and their orders from the security secretary.

Secondly, in an open society, which we want Hong Kong to be, the police can only function with the consent of the people. They can only do the work they are asked or ordered to do with the support and cooperation of the population.

The police lost any consent they had several weeks ago, when they adopted means of law enforcement more akin to police in an authoritarian state, where consent is given by authoritarian masters.

If Hong Kong is to find a way out of its current morass, then all groups – people of all ages, government officials including our chief executive and executive councillors, legislators, and the police leadership – need to ponder the issues of consent and accountability with care.

Patrick Wood, Quarry Bay

Post