Hong Kong independence: Dismiss it as a pipe dream by young idealists
At what point does free speech become seditious under Hong Kong laws? At no point since we lack clear sedition laws. Even people who riot Mong Kok-style for independence can only be charged with rioting or causing public disorder.
At what point then does free speech become criminal? That too is blurry. Predictably, the so-called democracy camp sets a far higher threshold than the so-called establishment camp. Only a national security law can bring clarity.
Is it time to reconsider such a law now that independence sentiment is growing? Answer that at your own peril.
Can anyone envisage our well-fed, fashion-conscious youngsters swapping their iPhones for AK-47s?
But one thing is for sure. The shriller the independence voice gets, the tighter Beijing’s fist will clench in demanding that Hong Kong fulfils its constitutional duty to pass Article 23 legislation.
Justice Secretary Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung insists free speech is not limitless. True, but an arbitrary criminal line to muzzle the free speech of independence advocates would strike at the heart of our core values.
Yet it’s also true that independence groups haven’t suddenly sprung up just to exercise free speech. They have grander goals. Otherwise, the pro-independence National Party would have named itself the Free Speech Party. Convenor Chan Ho-tin has likened his group to a revolutionary party whose members must remain anonymous. That has more of a menacing than a Gandhian ring to it.
How exactly do independence groups intend to achieve their goal? That’s the question that should most concern us, not their free speech rights. Yet we have allowed the free speech squabbling to cloud this larger issue. Hong Kong’s constitution stops well short of allowing independence, self-determination or even a referendum to decide our fate. It only allows Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy.
Using free speech to peacefully demand independence will fall on deaf ears in Beijing. So will holding a constitutionally disallowed referendum to determine Hong Kong’s political future as independence groups have proposed.
What then? Armed struggle? Chan hasn’t ruled this out. Can anyone envisage our well-fed, fashion-conscious youngsters swapping their iPhones for AK-47s? Will the People’s Liberation Army smirk before mowing them down or send them scurrying just by cocking their rifles?
Most Hongkongers dismiss independence as a non-starter. Yet senior mainland officials and our own chief executive have used such heavy language to speak out against it that they’re actually giving it traction. Surely, the better strategy is to smilingly dismiss it as a pipe dream by young idealists.
