(Diagnosing the Case of the Disqualification of Four Members of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region: A Prognosis of Judicial Indigestion of an Interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress)

Purpose After direct elections were instituted in Hong Kong and the sovereignty was transferred from Britain to China, politicization inevitably followed democratization. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the pro-democratic political parties’ politics in Hong Kong in recent history. Design/methodology/approach The research was conducted through a historical comparative analysis, within the context of Hong Kong after the sovereignty handover and the interim period of crucial democratization. Findings With the implementation of “One country, Two systems,” political democratization was hindered in Hong Kong’s transformation. The democratic forces have no alternative but to seek more radicalized politics, which has caused a decisive and ineluctable fragmentation of the local political parties. Originality/value This paper explores and evaluates the political history of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region under “One country, Two systems” and the ways in which the limited democratization hinders the progress of Hong Kong’s transformation.

Download Full-text

The Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region : a study of its role, powers and functions in Hong Kong's political system

10.5353/th_b5053412 ◽

2013 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Yu Gu

Keyword(s):

Hong Kong ◽

Political System ◽

Special Administrative Region ◽

Legislative Council ◽

Administrative Region

Download Full-text

The Politics of the Debate over the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong

The China Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0305741000004008 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 161 ◽

pp. 221-239 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Lo Shiu Hing

Keyword(s):

Hong Kong ◽

Special Administrative Region ◽

State Council ◽

Privy Council ◽

Standing Committee ◽

Legal Scholar ◽

Republic Of China ◽

Basic Law ◽

Set Up ◽

People's Congress

Before the transfer of Hong Kong's sovereignty from Britain to the People's Republic of China (PRC) on 1 July 1997, the politics of interpreting the Basic Law had already become apparent. This article aims to use the debate over the Court of Final Appeal (COFA), which was set up in July 1997 to replace the Privy Council in Britain as the court of final adjudication in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), to analyse how the Basic Law had already been interpreted by PRC officials, their British counterparts and the Hong Kong people. The interpretation of the Basic Law involves many people from both Hong Kong and China. As one legal scholar writes: “In one sense all kinds of people [in the HKSAR] will have to interpret the Basic Law: civil servants and other administrators and lawyers in their day-today work, legislators to ensure that their legislation and motions are consistent with it, the State Council [in the PRC], the National People's Congress Standing Committee, even private parties since some provisions affect private acts.” The debate over the COFA may also help towards an understanding of the ongoing interpretation of various provisions of the Basic Law, which serves as the mini-constitution of the HKSAR.

Download Full-text

English in Hong Kong

PMLA ◽

10.1632/pmla.2016.131.5.1527 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 131 (5) ◽

pp. 1527-1530

Author(s):

Sharanya Jayawickrama

Keyword(s):

Hong Kong ◽

World War Ii ◽

Self Determination ◽

World War ◽

Government Service ◽

Standing Committee ◽

Mainland Chinese ◽

Legislative Council ◽

Basic Law ◽

People's Congress

As 2016 Draws to a Close, the Most Hotly Debated Topic in Hong Kong is the Controversial Behavior of Two Newly elected legislators of a localist political party during their oath taking at the Legislative Council earlier this year. The proindependence advocates roused anger among mainland Chinese and local Hong Kong officials and citizens alike when they declared allegiance to the “Hong Kong nation” and pronounced “China” in a way that painfully echoed for many the derogatory pronunciation used by the Japanese forces that occupied Hong Kong in World War II. Ironically, in their attempts to lobby for the Hong Kong people's interests and right to self-determination, the legislators were accused of ignoring Hong Kong's history and disrespecting those who had perished during or survived those dark days. Subsequently, China's National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) issued an interpretation of Hong Kong's Basic Law that disqualified the pair from government service and preempted any ruling by a local Hong Kong court. This decision prompted thirteen thousand Hong Kong people to take to the streets in protest against what is widely perceived as the mainland's tightening of control over its special administrative region.

Download Full-text