top | item 20138546

Hundreds of thousands take to Hong Kong streets against controversial bill

289 points| cow9 | 6 years ago |scmp.com

101 comments

order
[+] hkai|6 years ago|reply
Just finished the 8 hour march. That was insane.

But the law is even more insane. A North Korea-like totalitarian state that puts people in camps can just snatch any lawyer, businessman our journalist and take them away without trial and without revealing their location.

Imagine people at startups working in sensitive areas like DNA testing, biotech, finance or data mining can be taken away and forced to reveal data, trade secrets, or forced to collaborate, under threat to their families or themselves.

[+] eldavido|6 years ago|reply
(Perspective of an American who lives in a US Chinatown and speaks to many HKers, also went there last year)

Hong Kong is over.

Historically, it benefited from being one of the only open ports, proximate to China, but not in it. Good governance and rule of law (very important for mercantile activity, given how much finance, insurance, and complex legal codes around ownership / title / possession), nice real estate, etc.

Today, it feels like the PRC is playing the long game, and they're going to win -- they'll just hang up their hats and wait 50 years, only a generation or two, until they eventually take complete control of Hong Kong, maybe going as far as outright annexation. They're patient, determined, and focused in a way only a place ruled by a powerful, long-term oriented elite oligopoly can be (vs in the US, where we still can't fix Social Security, even though everyone knows it's a train wreck in the making, or build anything remotely resembling China's current high-speed rail network).

The real question I have is, what's going to happen in China when Xi Jinping (dictator for life) can no longer rule effectively? Will he willingly stop aside or is there going to be some kind of coup / violent overthrow if the CCP splits and can't decide whether or not it's time to replace him? That's what's got me thinking these days.

[+] kiostech|6 years ago|reply
Same here, I am a Hong Konger. There are more 1 million people in this protest. The protest started at 2:30 pm in Victoria Park and ended at 10:00 pm in the Central Government Offices.

Personally, I think the Chinese Central Government won't recall the Extradition Law. But as a Hong Konger, I can proudly say that: We do our best to show the world, showing the Hong Kong spirit.

[+] cfarm|6 years ago|reply
Do people think they'll be able to change things?
[+] arthurcolle|6 years ago|reply
Can you tell us more about your experiences as a participant in the march?
[+] dqpb|6 years ago|reply
Looks like the PRC still wants to turn Hong Kong into paste.
[+] CamelCaseName|6 years ago|reply
For anyone like me who was looking for some background on this, on Reddit, someone linked to a Vox video entitled "China is erasing its border with Hong Kong" [0]. At 15 minutes, it's a captivating introduction to the conflict.

Another video (6 minutes) you might be interested in by Vox is "China's trillion dollar plan to dominate global trade" [1], which is on China Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyxG4vTyZ8

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvXROXiIpvQ

Edit: One great passage from the first video [0] at 11:29 says:

"The [umbrella movement] protest didn't change the government's mind and it didn't immediately change anything in Hong Kong.

But this spectacle of young people rising up to defend their rights from the central government of China did spark a political awakening among the many in the city who had never before paid attention.

'I think post-umbrella movement was the first time that the middle class came out and voted in droves, and voted for the opposition force.' - HK Resident"

[+] Leary|6 years ago|reply
World bank analysis of BRI which shows that BRI is a net positive to the world:

" BRI will potentially have a large effect on trade and welfare for many countries ▪ All countries in the world experience a decrease in trade costs ▪ Not all sectors/countries will gain but potential aggregate effect is largely positive

But many policy barriers still remain in place. Potential gains of BRI would be enlarged by complementary reforms ▪ Need to reduce border delays, trade barriers and FDI restrictions ▪ But also boost investor protection, open public procurement, ensure private sector participation

Economic and non-economic risks associated to BRI projects need to be managed ▪ Public debt sustainability, governance, environmental and social concerns ▪ Coordination problems, lack of data, poor transparency magnify these challenges"

[1]http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/501961539875310440/Michele-B...

[+] chii|6 years ago|reply
The vox video paints the Belt and Road Initiative in a negative light - which i feel is wrong. Why shouldn't China be allowed to invest and gain soft power? Why shouldn't they be allowed to make deals with countries the US deems 'undemocratic'?
[+] PakG1|6 years ago|reply
This article is published in the SCMP. The SCMP was purchased some time ago by Jack Ma. There were fears from various corners that Jack Ma, being friendly with the mainland Chinese government, would influence the SCMP to have coverage that was less independent than before. So it's interesting to see this published by SCMP.
[+] heraclius|6 years ago|reply
The SCMP seems to have been fairly vocal. There doesn’t seem to be anything that would stop the removal of all the critical journalists though, so I am somewhat confused.
[+] xiii1408|6 years ago|reply
The SCMP wants to be seen as an authoritative regional news source, so it avoids blatantly biased coverage on the news side. It's generally pretty neutral.

The opinion and longform side of the paper are another matter, though. Almost all the columnists are pro-Beijing hacks at this point. It's kind of like how there's a divide at Fox between the "news" side, which is relatively reasonable (e.g. with Chris Wallace), and the "opinion" side (e.g. Bill O'Reilly an his ilk). While the news folk at these kinds of places might be principled journalists, their ultimate purpose is to legitimize the propagandists on the opinion side.

[+] rayiner|6 years ago|reply
I was just starting high school when the handover of Hong Kong to China happened. Being pretty politically engaged at the time, I remember being surprised that everyone (in the US) was so blasé about it. This was the Clinton era, during the first tech boom. It was an optimistic, post Red Scare time. Everyone (here in the US) assumed the arrow of history pointed in the direction of progress, and that Hong Kong would retain the freedoms it had previously enjoyed.
[+] isaaafc|6 years ago|reply
The HK government's response: https://www.news.gov.hk/eng/2019/06/20190609/20190609_231141...

The English and Chinese versions looks pretty different in tone, especially in the last sentence: 'Noting that the Second Reading debate on the bill will resume on June 12, the Government urged the Legislative Council to scrutinise the bill in a calm, reasonable and respectful manner to help ensure Hong Kong remains a safe city for residents and business.'

Understandable when this is for foreign press. Directly translated, the Chinese version says: 'The Second Reading debate on the bill will resume on June 12. End. '. Obnoxious if you understand Chinese.

[+] TazeTSchnitzel|6 years ago|reply
Since Hong Kong is a former British colony, English is co-official with written Chinese there, and you can read the official brief and the text of the bill in English on the Legislative Council website: https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr18-19/english/bc/bc56/general/bc5...
[+] ksec|6 years ago|reply
>English is co-official with written Chinese there,

That is not strictly true, while both Chinese and English are the official languages, In writing, especially with any legals documents, in case of any discrepancy between the English version and the Chinese version, the English version shall prevail.

[+] denverkarma|6 years ago|reply
It was interesting to see the photos of the Union Jacks marching around. Anyone with first hand experience in Hong Kong, are there many people who wish for a return to the commonwealth, or is that a tiny minority?
[+] terenceng2010|6 years ago|reply
I would say that most HK ppl just want a stable environment to live and happy to have a status quo. But recently, given the circumstance, more ppl do think UK can take more measures, say, in some way, to allow BNO holder to work and settle easier in UK, given that these holders are willing to and capable to do so.

And ppl might miss the last decades of British rules too, in an emotional way, as Economically and culturally HK was in a very good shape. Though most ppl won’t express it with a union flag in a public setting.

[+] loyukfai|6 years ago|reply
While many may miss the colonial rule for various reasons, most HK people who grew up under the British rule are realistic and understand a return to the commonwealth is nigh impossible under the current situation.

I'd venture to say it's overall a tiny minority, mostly youth.

Many more are those who'd or are considering (re-) emigration.

[+] rococode|6 years ago|reply
Could someone explain to me what the plan is for the end of the 50 year transition period? From my extremely uninformed point of view, this feels like delaying the inevitable. Is there a different outcome than Hong Kong eventually being entirely under the Chinese government?
[+] loyukfai|6 years ago|reply
Am not sure there was any solid plans. People have, or had, different aspirations.

It, more than anything, IMO, was said to appease the fear of the HK people who had a deep mistrust of the PRC government. Still, a lot of people emigrated before 1997.

Note that the saying is kind of vague anyway, it just says that the capitalist system and "ways of living" will not change.

[+] ETHisso2017|6 years ago|reply
> The latest proposal has come after a 19-year-old Hong Kong man allegedly murdered his 20-year-old pregnant girlfriend while they were holidaying in Taiwan together in February last year. The man fled Taiwan and returned to Hong Kong last year.

> Taiwanese officials have sought help from Hong Kong authorities to extradite the man, but Hong Kong officials say they cannot comply because of the lack of an extradition agreement with Taiwan.

> But the Taiwanese government has said it will not seek to extradite the murder suspect under the proposed changes, and has urged Hong Kong to handle the case separately.

I thought the extradition bill was to / from China? What does Taiwan have to do with this?

[+] rrrrreeeee|6 years ago|reply
Because in PRC's mind, Taiwan is a part of the PRC
[+] yskchu|6 years ago|reply
This article has a nice infographic: https://multimedia.scmp.com/infographics/news/hong-kong/arti...

Basically Hong Kong right now, has a whole bunch of extradition treaties with 20 countries[1], just not with both China governments, due to the existing law. The bill fixes this.

Also, the 19 year old HK man admitted to the crime [2], however due to the the crime being committed outside HK, he can't be tried for manslaughter in HK; the HK authorities can only charge him with "money laundering" of his girlfriend's money and property (again [2]). He is currently serving the sentence for money laundering, and he's going to be released in October. However if this bill is passed he can be extradited and tried for murder in Taiwan.

[1] With Australia, Britain, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Finland, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, Portugal, South Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka and the United States

[2] https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30...

[+] rolltiide|6 years ago|reply
Its a general extradition bill I suppose

Or maybe the Hong Kong government can't distinguish between both China's? Like a bill that discusses extradition with mainland China's PRC by default is referring Taiwan China's ROC. That wouldn't surprise me since all of greater china is basically a twilight zone mockery to the nation state concept.

[+] enraged_camel|6 years ago|reply
When I was in HK a few years ago, there was a lot of annoyance amongst the general public that GovHK was starting to get dominated by pro-China individuals. So I get the impression this bill is their doing.
[+] cwperkins|6 years ago|reply
Whatever side you are on here just remember, Freedom of assembly is such an important right to hold dear. With the censorious nature of the Chinese Communist Party, I fear what the implications of a bill like this could lead to.
[+] SubiculumCode|6 years ago|reply
To me its quite.clear there is one right side in this, and it.lies with the people marching.
[+] Tharkun|6 years ago|reply
Also remember what happened during the mass protests 30 years ago. Stay safe.
[+] el_cujo|6 years ago|reply
In fifteen minutes the permit to organize expires, lets hope this remains (mostly) peaceful.
[+] jameslin|6 years ago|reply
What the protesters don't tell you is that there are nearly 1 million HKers signed and counting supporting the bill.

https://www.safeguardhongkong.hk/

[+] throwaway1997|6 years ago|reply
These online petitions tend to be largely filled in by people from North of the border. There is no way of verifying that the signatories are Hong Kong people (the only validation is the last four digits of HKID which can be any four digit number)
[+] yorwba|6 years ago|reply
Archived version with the vote counter stuck at 500,720: http://web.archive.org/web/20190528205611/https://www.safegu...

Unless that site requires valid ID to sign in support, I immediately disbelieve the number because bot activity is basically inevitable. (Not that I don't believe that there are people in Hong Kong who support the bill, just that online signatures don't help figure out how many there are.)

[+] jameslin|6 years ago|reply
Nice, website was working before I posted here, guess some protesters here don't like it.
[+] mothsonasloth|6 years ago|reply
Will this break any of the terms with the British Hong Kong handover?

AFAIK the agreement mentions that China must not interfere politically or economically with the capitalistic nature of Hong Kong for at least 50 years.

[+] JumpCrisscross|6 years ago|reply
> Will this break any of the terms with the British Hong Kong handover?

China stopped honouring its agreement shortly after Xi Jinping ensconced himself as leader for life. That resulted in the umbrella protests against Beijing interfering with who could run for office [1]. There were also the abductions of Hong Kongers selling books publicising corruption and scandal among the CPC’s elite [2].

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/24/hong-kong-sele...

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/08/hong-kong-book...

[+] intopieces|6 years ago|reply
What does it mean to break the agreement, anyway? Is the UK going to come take HK back?
[+] denverkarma|6 years ago|reply
As an outside observer it seems like China doesn’t care very much about upholding agreements. And why should they? It’s not like Britain or anyone else in the west is willing to start a war with China, no matter what they do.
[+] powerapple|6 years ago|reply
a solution to all problems: referendum.
[+] terenceng2010|6 years ago|reply
It might not change HK government attitude after all, but it shows that Hong Kongers align with western values - no one should live under the fear of arbitrary prosecution.
[+] heraclius|6 years ago|reply
This idea that fundamental human rights are “western values” is profoundly unhelpful, because it implies that in some sense to fight injustice is to no longer be truly Chinese—a nonsense whose propagation is both supported by and helpful to the CCP.
[+] math_and_stuff|6 years ago|reply
Why say 'align with western values' instead of 'respect human rights'? Freedom of speech and assembly are encoded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.