All options must be considered in extradition law saga
- Tensions have continued to escalate since lawmakers clashed and Carrie Lam refused to backtrack, indicating the answer may lie in compromise by those involved
Political compromise is an art that the chief executive and lawmakers have yet to master. As if clashes over the extradition bill in the Legislative Council are not enough, the stakes have been raised even higher by Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor linking the passage of the law to her authority and governance. The escalating tension is not in Hong Kong’s interest and to break the deadlock the government must be prepared to consider other options.
With the bill languishing in the legislature for weeks, the administration is understandably frustrated and, while it is up to lawmakers to move forward, it would be disingenuous of the government to treat it as purely a procedural matter. The impasse stems from fears that people could be sent to the mainland for trial. By rejecting a proposal of three-way talks with rival camps, the government has also missed an opportunity to defuse the row.
Lam may think that much of the fear and criticism is misguided, but there remains genuine concern, not only regarding the way the bill is being pushed through, but also the safeguards enshrined in the Basic Law and the principle of “one country, two systems”. Although the government has repeatedly pledged to listen to different views, the perception is that the bill must be passed without substantive changes by summer. Such an approach can hardly ease the worries of the public or calm political resistance. Whether business-affiliated loyalists will vote for the bill is also uncertain at this stage.
The escalating trade war between the United States and China has complicated the matter further. While Beijing is likely to dismiss any foreign concern over the bill as interference in the city’s affairs, the international community has a legitimate interest when institutional safeguards are seen as jeopardised.
Earlier, Lam was forced to abandon a controversial plan to adjust cross-harbour tunnel tolls, and moves to raise the age limit for elderly social welfare payments also suffered a setback. But give and take is all part and parcel of politics. There is no need to link the outcome of a particular proposal to governance and authority.
The legislative matter is further complicated by Taiwan, which has indicated it will not accept the transfer of a Hong Kong murder suspect under the proposed framework for fear its citizens in the city may be extradited to the mainland.
A top mainland official yesterday said Hong Kong and Beijing needed to work harder to allay people’s fears. He described the bill as essential and called for rational discussion. It has also been suggested the city government should first tackle the Taiwan case separately, pending wider consultation on the arrangement with the mainland. Getting the bill passed by July need not be the only way forward. The government should be prepared to consider different options.