Source:
https://scmp.com/comment/letters/article/3032273/carrie-lams-reaction-question-hong-kongs-self-rule-confirms
Opinion/ Letters

Carrie Lam’s reaction to a question on Hong Kong’s ‘self-rule’ confirms a worrying trend away from autonomy

  • The phrases ‘high degree of self-rule’ and ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong’ often used to accompany references to ‘one country, two systems’ but this has become rare. To bridge the divide between her and the public, Carrie Lam should not shy away from those phrases
Chief Executive Carrie Lam’s first dialogue session with the community at Queen Elizabeth station, Wan Chai, on September 26 did little to ease Hong Kong’s discontent. Photo: Reuters

I was taken quite aback when Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor tried to correct a young man who said he supports “one country, two systems” and Hong Kong being “self-ruled” during her dialogue session on September 26.

Like most Hongkongers, who have not studied the Basic Law and the Joint Sino-British Declaration in detail, I simply trusted what the Chinese government promised us some 30 years ago: “one country, two systems”, “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong” and “a high degree of self-rule”. I am aware that many official documents in English use the word “autonomy” instead of “self-rule” but the Chinese term can be literally translated as “self-rule”.

Moreover, official documents have begun to use the word “administering” instead of “ruling” Hong Kong.

In the first 15 years after the handover, we often heard the three phrases and felt reassured. But in the past seven years, the last two phrases seem to be rarely mentioned in speeches made by Chinese leaders at plenary meetings and in important national documents.

At first, I thought the media was being too sensitive or trying to be critical. But over time, even in Hong Kong, you don’t hear the latter two phrases anymore. Then I realised that if something, no matter how important it is, is no longer mentioned, people do forget it.

These days people just talk about “one country, two systems”, which is very vague in meaning and subject to interpretation. However, the concept becomes much clearer when qualified by the two phrases that used to follow it.

Shenzhen, as a special economic zone, has a different system. Shanghai also practises one of its own in its free-trade zone. But what makes the system in Hong Kong unique is that Hong Kong should be essentially self-ruled, as promised.

I would understand if Lam tries to argue that “a high degree” does not mean “complete” autonomy. But she seemed so absolutely sure that Hong Kong being self-ruled is at odds with “one country, two systems”, which worries me. This is the huge divide between her and many Hongkongers.

Finally, a small piece of advice for Lam: if she wants to get her feet back on the ground again, she could start using the phrases “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong” and “a high degree of self-rule” publicly and frequently.

A. Wong, Tsim Sha Tsui