Advertisement
I am writing in response to the article, “Hong Kong education chief denies changes to Liberal Studies textbooks amount to political censorship” (August 31).
The comments from Secretary Kevin Yeung Yun-hung, however, caused more confusion than relief – the logical inconsistencies in his argument causing many citizens to become more furious.
Let’s start with his point that separation of powers never existed in Hong Kong, “whether before 1997 or after”. That is objectively not true; Hong Kong always has been run on the “separation of powers” model. This is simply evident from how the government has different departments and buildings organised around its three branches: judicial, legislative and executive. The Basic Law sets out the system of checks and balances on executive power. The government promotes Hong Kong as Asia’s World City, boasting “an independent judiciary”. Thus, Secretary Yeung’s assertion that the separation of powers model never existed is really surprising to us.
Advertisement
Secondly, Secretary Yeung’s argument that there has been no censorship of education materials was unconvincing. The fact that sensitive descriptions and mentions of incidents such as the bloody Tiananmen crackdown from decades ago are being removed from textbooks and other materials is censorship by definition.
03:03
Hong Kong publishers resort to self-censorship under new security law
Hong Kong publishers resort to self-censorship under new security law
Finally, I would also like to address the grotesque fact that, despite the strong opposition to any reform of the liberal studies subject, despite the fact that over 10,000 people signed a petition against the changes to the textbooks – the government is pressing ahead. This will simply cause further uneasiness among the people, which could escalate into more unrest and chaos.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Select Voice
Select Speed
1.00x