The Hong Kong Government’s amendment of the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance has caused a great uproar. The 9th National Day Parade organized by the FDC has set the largest scale in Hong Kong in recent years. Not only that, but in order to oppose the Hong Kong government’s forced resumption of the second reading of the Legislative Council, many people even launched a campaign to encircle the Legislative Council. There were also violent clashes between police and civilians.
Nowadays, the parties have different opinions. They criticize the Hong Kong Government for promoting the practice of repairing laws that are too sloppy and rushed. There are also voices that the Hong Kong people involved in the anti-reforms are lack of rationality and ideology, and others refer to external forces.
However, the more critical reason is that the long-standing grievances of Hong Kong people have not been effectively alleviated, including the feelings of the Mainland, Lin Zheng and the Hong Kong Government, as well as the economic and livelihood problems that have deteriorated all the year round.
Hong Kong people lack confidence in the rule of law in the Mainland
To be frank, the reason why the amendments have been normalized from the legality and necessity of justice is to be distorted into a “sending regulations” that a large number of Hong Kong people oppose, and then deteriorated into a street protest movement. It is indeed inside and outside. The result of the interaction. Undoubtedly, the Hong Kong Government has occupied justice and ignored the doubts of the Hong Kong people on the differences in the judicial system of the drylands. Under the circumstances of insufficient social consultation and consensus, the promotion of amendments is too strong and even arrogant. Some people have important reasons for distortion and stigma. The United States and the European Union countries are involved in anti-repair with rare high-density, frequent voices, and help, which are also factors that cannot be ignored.
However, the more critical reason than the Hong Kong government’s poor practices and external forces are that the long-standing grievances of Hong Kong people have not been effectively alleviated. Resentment is the internal cause under the labels of “reverse delivery” and defending personal freedom. After all, people who are somewhat rational are reluctant to see criminals go unpunished and will not let Hong Kong become a fugitive paradise. It is not difficult to see that the original intention of the amendment is to fill Hong Kong’s judicial loopholes and highlight judicial justice. The draft “Fugitive Offenders Ordinance”, which has been amended and improved by the Hong Kong Government, has long been set out to cover only the most serious offences punishable by imprisonment for seven years or more. The offence must be a crime prescribed in Hong Kong and the required jurisdiction. It does not involve freedom of assembly, news, speech, academics, publishing, and political crimes.
Regrettably, many Hong Kong people who oppose the amendments actually do not care about the contents of the draft. They simply oppose and worry. The amendments just give them reasons to vent their grievances. Their resentment first points to the contradiction between the land and the port, and it is a distrust of the judicial credibility of the mainland. Due to the colonial history of more than 150 years, there is inevitably a gap between Hong Kong and the Mainland. Many of the people of Hong Kong are descendants of the victims of the Mainland in the past. The “terrorism” mentality has always been a shadow of the lingering Hong Kong society. In addition, there are indeed problems of authoritarian maladjustment and human governance in the Mainland, the lack of judicial credibility, and the ideological perception of Hong Kong people in the Mainland. This has caused Hong Kong society to have doubts and dissatisfaction with the mainland governance system. Some of the cooperation and integration measures between the port and the port that have good intentions often encounter various obstacles.
The Lin Zheng government has not been trusted by the public
Since the middle of 2014, especially in recent years, in order to resolve the psychological barriers and grievances of Hong Kong people and promote the integration and development of the two places, Beijing has introduced many positive policy measures including the strategy of Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao Dawan District, but from this time In terms of scale anti-repair, Hong Kong people still have mistrust of the mainland judicial system and the entire governance system. The gap between the two places must be subtly resolved under the framework of “one country, two systems.”
The grievances of the citizens also point to political contradictions within Hong Kong. For a long time, the internal tears in Hong Kong have been severe, not only the tears of the establishment and the pan-population but also the dissatisfaction of the Hong Kong and the founding factions and the dissatisfaction of the younger generation with the Hong Kong Government. During Lin Zheng’s campaign, she was exposed to Beijing’s exclusive over-subscription and her tough stance on some major issues, which made her face a lack of recognition from the day of her election. Although she has tried to make some positive changes, she stressed that “the first priority is to repair the social tears” and “restore the public’s trust in the government”, but the results are not satisfactory, failing to effectively bridge the social tears, and even being criticized as “Doing the surface work.” During the amendments, a large number of young people’s protests reflected the considerable mistrust of Hong Kong people to Lin Zheng and the Hong Kong Government.
Economic and livelihood issues have long been plagued
In addition to the emotions of the Mainland, Lin Zheng and the Hong Kong Government, the deeper grievances of the Hong Kong people against the amendments are the problems of economic and livelihood that have deteriorated all the year round. Hong Kong has been the most difficult city to afford for nine consecutive years. As for public housing, the average waiting time for applicants remains at a high of 5.5 years. In this reality, nearly 210,000 people live in the mortuary, and the median living space per capita is only 56.5 square feet, which is still narrower than the 75 square feet of the Independent Department of the Correctional Services Department. Not only that, the Oxfam Hong Kong report last year showed that the Gini coefficient of Hong Kong is the most severely disparity between the rich and the poor in the developed economies. The Economist magazine also pointed out that Hong Kong has become the most serious place in global crony capitalism, with wealth concentration close to 80%. According to the data of the Hong Kong Government’s Commission on Poverty, the number of poor people in Hong Kong reached 1.352 million in 2016 and the poverty rate was nearly 20%.
It is normal for ordinary Hong Kong people who are overwhelmed by survival. In the course of this anti-reformance protest, there was a voice that “the root cause of Hong Kong lies in the problem of wealth distribution.” “Daily morning and evening, I saw those aged 70 or 80 who are looking for waste that can be exchanged for money in the trash can.” Even when we are eating food, we should know that Hong Kong is not far from the earthquake.” As the saying goes, the growing gap between the rich and the poor, high housing prices and rents, and the daunting cost of living will only make low- and middle-income groups and young people lose hope. In the long run, social grievances will only continue to accumulate and become more and more politicized.
Therefore, the current anti-revision in Hong Kong is the result of the interaction between multiple internal and external factors. However, compared with the rigidity of the Hong Kong Government and the external forces, the key internal factors are the anxiety and resentment of the people of Hong Kong, especially the economic and livelihood. Deep structural contradictions and conflicts between the systems and values of the two places are the most fundamental. The so-called internal factors determine that external and external factors work through internal factors. Regardless of whether there are amendments or external interventions, Hong Kong will have difficulty getting out of the dilemma if it fails to solve Hong Kong’s internal factors. In this sense, both the Occupy-China incident and the Mong Kok riots and this anti-revision are the key factors behind the internal factors and the most fundamental and most difficult challenges to be tackled in Hong Kong.