Occupy Central
Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014. It calls on thousands of protesters to block roads and paralyse Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council elections in 2020 according to "international standards." The movement was initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, in January 2013.
Umbrella Movement
The Umbrella Movement (Chinese: 雨傘運動; pinyin: yǔsǎn yùndòng) is a loose political movement that was created spontaneously during the Hong Kong protests of 2014. Its name derives from the recognition of the umbrella as a symbol of defiance and resistance against the Hong Kong government, and the united grass-roots objection to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of 31 August.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 02:
Full coverage of the day’s events
'Don't forget the original goal': new pro-democracy banner slung on Hong Kong's Victoria Peak
An impressive feat of mountaineering today saw yet another giant banner hung up in Hong Kong, this time on Victoria Peak.
Sporting the wording 'Don't forget the original goal' - in reference to protesters ongoing push for universal suffrage - the giant yellow sign is the fourth to have been put up by Occupy supporters over the last couple of months.
Hong Kong rights groups set up database on Occupy police violence complaints
Several human rights groups have set up a database to collect visual or written accounts of police violence as an alternative to evidence collected by the force's internal complaints mechanism, which they said had little credibility.
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 17 December, 2014, 4:25am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 17 December, 2014, 4:25am
How will justice be seen to be done in wake of Occupy Central protests?
So how will justice be seen to be done over Occupy?
Mass trials, prosecutions targeting just a few, or an amnesty - that is the question. Police have arrested almost 1,000 protesters so far who broke the law in the name of civil disobedience. Another 75 have turned themselves in. Police are hunting for more offenders. Will they be made to face the full force of the law? Public Eye has no idea. Some scaled the security fence of government headquarters in Admiralty, some called on people to storm the HQ, some incited protesters to begin a mass civil disobedience protest, some conspired to plot such a protest, and some used metal barricades to charge police lines. Should the book be thrown at them or should they be let off the hook for the sake of political expediency? The three initiators of Occupy Central who surrendered themselves will admit only to illegal assembly. Likewise for the politicians - and the media boss who bankrolls them - who all made a big show of being arrested without resistance during the Admiralty clearance. Presumably, they will all admit guilt. Otherwise, they will turn their grandstanding surrender into a farce. Admitting to peaceful participation in an illegal assembly is no big deal. A lenient judge would probably let them off with a warning. Maybe that is why many smiled or shouted slogans while surrendering or being arrested. But will those whose lives were turned upside down by Occupy settle for lawbreakers being let off lightly? Most of those arrested during the 79 days of protests have been released unconditionally after refusing bail. Commissioner of Police Andy Tsang Wai-hung has set a three-month deadline to decide who to charge and with what. Is a lenient approach in the works to put this divisive chapter in our political history behind us? Tsang talked tough about targeting the instigators. But the movement was leaderless, so who exactly are they? What will it do to our rule of law if the many thousands who paralysed our streets for so long are not made to face the consequences of their actions? Will the 1.8 million Hongkongers who backed an anti-Occupy campaign cry foul if only a few instigators are brought to justice? Will the pan-democratic camp scream political persecution if we see mass trials? The occupied streets are now clear, but the road ahead is lined with booby traps.
Claim of external aid for protesters doesn't add up
Is he talking through his rear end, or does he know something we all don't know? Chen Zuoer, former deputy director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office and now a top adviser to Beijing, has made the jaw-dropping claim that an American organisation bankrolled supplies "worth at least HK$200 million to HK$300 million" for the Occupy camps. That is an awful lot of money, whichever way you look at it. Fantasy or fact? Public Eye does not know. But the starting point should be to ask ourselves if the tents, free food, water, blankets, goggles and hard hats that we all saw at the various protest sites were worth HK$300 million. If no, then let us lay to rest this business about external forces being involved. If the supplies are indeed worth HK$300 million, then how credible is the claim that it all came from local donations, given the well-organised way the supplies were distributed? What struck us was the huge pile of abandoned tents and other supplies amassed during the clearance operations. If it was your own tent, would you not have kept it?
Michael Chugani is a columnist and television show host.mickchug@gmail.com
Justice secretary Rimsky Yuen rejects criticism he 'indulged' government over Occupy Central
Court injunctions serve to uphold rights under civil law, justice secretary argues
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 17 December, 2014,
Rimsky Yuen has drawn criticism from his own secondary school.
The justice secretary has defended himself against criticism from members of his alma mater that he has exploited the courts in handling the Occupy protests.
Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung said yesterday that he disagreed with the views expressed by alumni, pupils, parents and former teachers of Queen Elizabeth School in a Monday newspaper advertisement that accused him of failing in his job.
The ad, placed by the group of 270, slammed Yuen for "indulging" the government, which hid behind civil court cases sought by private parties to clear Occupy sites in Mong Kok and Admiralty and solve what was supposed to be a political problem.
"This view has been stated for quite a while. But excuse me, to be frank, I don't agree with what they say," Yuen said.
He said there were considerations of civil law as well as criminal law, which would mean prosecution, such as for taking part in unauthorised assemblies.
"You cannot say that because there is a criminal side [to the protests], we should not let others seek an injunction to protect their rights under civil law."
Yuen also addressed another point made in the ad, that he had met the minibus and taxi operators that applied for the court orders. That meeting raised doubts that public money had been used to help the litigants.
"This is a misunderstanding," he said. "The incident is rare. Very few injunctions come under this kind of situation, and therefore we must have meetings to give the police advice. We did not give the plaintiffs legal advice."
The police were involved because, in the injunction cases targeting the Mong Kok site, the court allowed the applicants to seek help from officers if they were unable to clear the area.
The ad urged Yuen to uphold the school motto to "prepare yourself that you may serve" and stay true to his conscience.
Earlier in the day, Yuen attended a law conference in Macau in which he spoke about progress in setting up a "fugitive offenders agreement" and a "mutual legal assistance agreement" between Hong Kong and Macau.
Hongkongers charged in Macau could at present escape court proceedings as long as they stayed away from the former Portuguese enclave, he noted. The two governments were in the final stage of forming a joint task force and would prepare the needed legislation after signing the deals.
This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Yuen hits back over Occupy criticism
沒有留言:
張貼留言