9 ms·

They've made it. The Chief Executive apologized and the government has suspended the fugitive law amendment. That's really a RARE concession in these years beca

by swjz 7y ago

They've made it. The Chief Executive apologized and the government has suspended the fugitive law amendment. That's really a RARE concession in these years because the Chinese government typically doesn't compromise at all under pressure.

tyrust 7y ago
This is mentioned in the article as not being good enough and is just postponing the issue. (I would post a quote, but the Bloomberg mobile site is not cooperating with me).
CydeWeys 7y ago
"Suspended" just means that it would be passed as soon as the protest pressure lets up. That's not good enough. They haven't made it yet.
- trevyn 7y ago
  They could start protesting for regime change in Beijing. Being part of China goes both ways. :-)
- hellofunk 7y ago
  According to the news, it’s unlikely that any progress on the bill will be made until next year, based on this protest. It is not just suspended, they also canceled further open discussions about it.
- pishpash 7y ago
  "Suspended" is a word to save face. Article 23 passage is also "suspended". For all practical purposes the bill's dead.
yingw787 7y ago
Yea no the HK govt needs to withdraw the bill and explicitly guarantee no extradition without conviction under HK law for people to feel safe. If China can extradite whoever they want from HK, HK has no sovereignty and no separate identity from China.
swjz 7y ago
That's indeed true. But I see such suspension as a kind of signal that Beijing would like to compromise, which is nearly impossible. In practice, the "suspension" simply means that it's over because Beijing doesn't want to "lose face" and intentionally picked a moderate word to make both sides happy.
- swjz 7y ago
  Note that the government statement says "There is no timetable for restarting the process." Even if the government had completely retracted the amendment, they could draft another amendment anytime anyway. That's why I think they've made it.
manigandham 7y ago
This is nothing but a temporary delay. It will still be passed soon enough. Remember Hong Kong is on a 50 year countdown anyway so there’s always an inevitable end coming.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- aaron_m04 7y ago
  Who knows what things will be like then? China could be a democracy or something else.
- hellofunk 7y ago
  According to the news, it’s unlikely that any progress on the bill will be made until next year, based on this protest. It is not just suspended, they also canceled further open discussions about it.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  > Remember Hong Kong is on a 50 year countdown anyway so there’s always an inevitable end coming. I used to think that and it is logical But the basic law does not have an expiration date, only HK’s geographical status does So it theoretically can still exist under a separate legal system , the point is that there are possibilities
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  "The current social and economic systems in Hong Kong will remain unchanged, and so will the life-style. Rights and freedoms, including those of the person, of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of travel, of movement, of correspondence, of strike, of choice of occupation, of academic research and of religious belief will be ensured by law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Private property, ownership of enterprises, legitimate right of inheritance and foreign investment will be protected by law." http://www.gov.cn/english/2007-06/14/content_649468.htm http://www.gov.cn/english/2007-06/14/content_649468.htm China needs the West and it is politically unsavvy for China to renege on the rights granted before 2047. However, the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat the Joint Declaration as "void". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration
hker 7y ago
> They've made it. The Chief Executive apologized and the government has suspended the fugitive law amendment. That's really a RARE concession in these years because the Chinese government typically doesn't compromise at all under pressure. First, the government is suspending the law amendment, not retracting it. The law amendment could be revived in a month or two--that is, after enough leaders have been arrested and the protest cools down, just like how they cold-handled the Umbrella protest in 2014, or many other protests in China--for all we know now. Second, the government is arresting people under the charge of "riot" [1]--despite HN'ers labeling such protest as non-violent, the charge of riot means a maximum term of 10 years--and they arrest people even by violating patients' privacy and eroding trust from patients to doctors [2]. If charged, some protesters have to pay a high price, joining others who have been paying the price due to Umbrella protest. I would not say they have made it until the law is at least retracted. [1]: https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/13/hong-kong-protesters-charged-rioting-hospital-visit/ https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/13/hong-kong-protesters-c... [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/c0l9vl/hk_hospital_authority_has_issued_this_letter_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/c0l9vl/hk_hospita...
- swjz 7y ago
  I agree with you that the government should release all protesters arrested. I actually don't care about the difference between "suspension without timetable for restarting" and "retraction" because even if the government had completely retracted the amendment, they could draft another amendment anytime anyway.
  - loyukfai 7y ago
    Yes, but many of the HK protesters, somehow, became obsessed with the terminology. It's part of a broader war between the government and the opposing faction.
    - GordonS 7y ago
      I don't think this is quibbling over terminology - "suspending" is a temporary measure, and governments being governments, there's every chance it would be "unsuspended" once the protesters melt away.
DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
> the Chinese government typically doesn't compromise at all under pressure. This isn't the central government of China. The government in question is the government of the Hong Kong SAR.
- swjz 7y ago
  Yeah, but obviously the Chief Executive simply takes Beijing's order for all such big movements.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    That's not obvious. Hong Kong has its own political dynamic, and is deeply divided between pro- and anti-Beijing camps.
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      The chief executive is basically a pawn of Beijing, where democracy is limited and many delegates who elect the CEO are appointed by pro Beijing groups. If HK got rid of their appointed delegates, the anti-Beijing group would have a clear majority.
      - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
        It's not clear who would have the majority if functional constituencies were eliminated. The pro-Beijing camp got a higher proportion of the popular vote than the anti-Beijing camp in the last Legislative Council election. Yes, democracy is limited in Hong Kong. The city has never been ruled democratically. The issue now is that Beijing will not take the risk of allowing separatists to take power. As for the Chief Executive's actions, it's not entirely clear to what extent she's responding to popular pressure, business groups in Hong Kong that want stability, or the central government.
        swjz 7y ago
        > As for the Chief Executive's actions, it's not entirely clear to what extent she's responding to popular pressure, business groups in Hong Kong that want stability, or the central government. I would say, the Chief Executive is more like a coordinator between Hong Kong and Beijing on such big issues. I don't think she is able to make important decisions like this on her own.
ww520 7y ago
Not yet. She needs to take responsibility and step down.

by swjz 7y ago

tyrust 7y ago

This is mentioned in the article as not being good enough and is just postponing the issue. (I would post a quote, but the Bloomberg mobile site is not cooperating with me).

CydeWeys 7y ago

"Suspended" just means that it would be passed as soon as the protest pressure lets up. That's not good enough. They haven't made it yet.

trevyn 7y ago
They could start protesting for regime change in Beijing. Being part of China goes both ways. :-)
hellofunk 7y ago
According to the news, it’s unlikely that any progress on the bill will be made until next year, based on this protest. It is not just suspended, they also canceled further open discussions about it.
pishpash 7y ago
"Suspended" is a word to save face. Article 23 passage is also "suspended". For all practical purposes the bill's dead.

yingw787 7y ago

Yea no the HK govt needs to withdraw the bill and explicitly guarantee no extradition without conviction under HK law for people to feel safe. If China can extradite whoever they want from HK, HK has no sovereignty and no separate identity from China.

swjz 7y ago

That's indeed true. But I see such suspension as a kind of signal that Beijing would like to compromise, which is nearly impossible. In practice, the "suspension" simply means that it's over because Beijing doesn't want to "lose face" and intentionally picked a moderate word to make both sides happy.

swjz 7y ago
Note that the government statement says "There is no timetable for restarting the process." Even if the government had completely retracted the amendment, they could draft another amendment anytime anyway. That's why I think they've made it.

manigandham 7y ago

This is nothing but a temporary delay. It will still be passed soon enough. Remember Hong Kong is on a 50 year countdown anyway so there’s always an inevitable end coming.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
aaron_m04 7y ago
Who knows what things will be like then? China could be a democracy or something else.
hellofunk 7y ago
According to the news, it’s unlikely that any progress on the bill will be made until next year, based on this protest. It is not just suspended, they also canceled further open discussions about it.
rolltiide 7y ago
> Remember Hong Kong is on a 50 year countdown anyway so there’s always an inevitable end coming. I used to think that and it is logical But the basic law does not have an expiration date, only HK’s geographical status does So it theoretically can still exist under a separate legal system , the point is that there are possibilities
JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
"The current social and economic systems in Hong Kong will remain unchanged, and so will the life-style. Rights and freedoms, including those of the person, of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of travel, of movement, of correspondence, of strike, of choice of occupation, of academic research and of religious belief will be ensured by law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Private property, ownership of enterprises, legitimate right of inheritance and foreign investment will be protected by law." http://www.gov.cn/english/2007-06/14/content_649468.htm http://www.gov.cn/english/2007-06/14/content_649468.htm China needs the West and it is politically unsavvy for China to renege on the rights granted before 2047. However, the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat the Joint Declaration as "void". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration

hker 7y ago

> They've made it. The Chief Executive apologized and the government has suspended the fugitive law amendment. That's really a RARE concession in these years because the Chinese government typically doesn't compromise at all under pressure. First, the government is suspending the law amendment, not retracting it. The law amendment could be revived in a month or two--that is, after enough leaders have been arrested and the protest cools down, just like how they cold-handled the Umbrella protest in 2014, or many other protests in China--for all we know now. Second, the government is arresting people under the charge of "riot" [1]--despite HN'ers labeling such protest as non-violent, the charge of riot means a maximum term of 10 years--and they arrest people even by violating patients' privacy and eroding trust from patients to doctors [2]. If charged, some protesters have to pay a high price, joining others who have been paying the price due to Umbrella protest. I would not say they have made it until the law is at least retracted. [1]: https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/13/hong-kong-protesters-charged-rioting-hospital-visit/ https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/13/hong-kong-protesters-c... [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/c0l9vl/hk_hospital_authority_has_issued_this_letter_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/c0l9vl/hk_hospita...

swjz 7y ago
I agree with you that the government should release all protesters arrested. I actually don't care about the difference between "suspension without timetable for restarting" and "retraction" because even if the government had completely retracted the amendment, they could draft another amendment anytime anyway.
- loyukfai 7y ago
  Yes, but many of the HK protesters, somehow, became obsessed with the terminology. It's part of a broader war between the government and the opposing faction.
  - GordonS 7y ago
    I don't think this is quibbling over terminology - "suspending" is a temporary measure, and governments being governments, there's every chance it would be "unsuspended" once the protesters melt away.

DiogenesKynikos 7y ago

> the Chinese government typically doesn't compromise at all under pressure. This isn't the central government of China. The government in question is the government of the Hong Kong SAR.

swjz 7y ago
Yeah, but obviously the Chief Executive simply takes Beijing's order for all such big movements.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  That's not obvious. Hong Kong has its own political dynamic, and is deeply divided between pro- and anti-Beijing camps.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    The chief executive is basically a pawn of Beijing, where democracy is limited and many delegates who elect the CEO are appointed by pro Beijing groups. If HK got rid of their appointed delegates, the anti-Beijing group would have a clear majority.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      It's not clear who would have the majority if functional constituencies were eliminated. The pro-Beijing camp got a higher proportion of the popular vote than the anti-Beijing camp in the last Legislative Council election. Yes, democracy is limited in Hong Kong. The city has never been ruled democratically. The issue now is that Beijing will not take the risk of allowing separatists to take power. As for the Chief Executive's actions, it's not entirely clear to what extent she's responding to popular pressure, business groups in Hong Kong that want stability, or the central government.
      - swjz 7y ago
        > As for the Chief Executive's actions, it's not entirely clear to what extent she's responding to popular pressure, business groups in Hong Kong that want stability, or the central government. I would say, the Chief Executive is more like a coordinator between Hong Kong and Beijing on such big issues. I don't think she is able to make important decisions like this on her own.

ww520 7y ago

Not yet. She needs to take responsibility and step down.