Hong Kong Legco vandalised: selective tolerance of violence comes home to roost

The English idiom is “spare the rod and spoil the child”. The Chinese one is more severe, “to tolerate evil is to encourage it”.

On June 9, the historic march of 1 million protesters was marred by a much smaller number of rioters resorting to violence that very night. But the march organiser said at a press conference he did not have the heart to condemn them. He was tolerating them.

On June 12, when police and rioters clashed, both sides used violence, as clearly seen in news footage of that day, but protesters accused police of excessive force, while demanding that their side not be called rioters, and that suspected rioters be released without trial because they were upholding “justice”. They were being unfair and harming the rule of law.

The outcome was that officers stood by even when protesters laid siege to police headquarters twice and obstructed entrances to government buildings. Then we saw a peaceful protest march on July 1 going a separate way from the extremists who stormed, then occupied, the Legislative Council building. They were extremely violent, deliberately throwing harmful substances to inflict bodily harm on policemen, as well as vandalising the Legco chamber.

But what did protesters say? Did they all separate themselves from and not support these terrorists, anarchists and nihilists who won’t be belittled as “rioters”? Some said the youngsters had to vent their anger because the government did not respond (meaning not satisfactorily) to their demands.

Pan-democratic lawmakers’ selective tolerance of a violent faction has produced this new breed of hooligans. These lawmakers have set a bad example for the youngsters for years, with their non-constructive, totally destructive actions in Legco.

Rupert Chan, Mid-Levels

Why was the attack on Legco allowed to happen?

Storming the Legislative Council was an act of vandalism and an unprecedented attack on our (limited) democratic institutions that must be deeply condemned. Not least because the prime cause of mass discontent is government policy, which Legco and its members neither decided nor controlled.

The dereliction of duty by our police is almost equally scandalous. To launch tear gas on unarmed protesters in Admiralty and falsely declare a riot is one thing, to sit on your hands and permit criminals to attack the Legco building is quite another.

Our police chief now seems risk-averse. This adds layers to the mistrust created by our security and police officials in these last two weeks. Are legislators not entitled to protection? Does the government care so little for Legco that it can be vandalised?

This was the time to crack down on the vandals. Instead, we’ll get further polarisation and mistrust. Unless police can find and convict the leaders of the attack, the leaders of the peaceful students and the millions of marchers – whose conduct has been exemplary – will suspect the motives of police who allowed this outrage.

We have had three suicides linked to Mrs Carrie Lam’s disgraceful, still unwithdrawn bill. Some people may have been driven to extremes; others might aim to provoke outrage. But the authorities who first stimulate, then accommodate, this lurch into senseless violence once again betray Hong Kong’s true interests.

Mrs Lam should have come up with a more responsible strategy after hiding for two weeks from Hongkongers: two weeks when she was surely not on holiday.

Paul Serfaty, Mid-Levels

Legco attackers were not rebels with a cause

I had been watching the whole day the live news broadcast of the siege of the Legislative Council building. These attackers were not rebels with a cause. These were purely violent hooligans. Nobody, whether journalist, legislator, local or foreign citizen, can legitimise whatever cause they claim to be fighting for, or excuse their actions.

I suggest extremely suspicious manipulations from without. Anarchy is what we have on our hands now.

Y.N. Cheng, Sai Ying Pun