POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 42 (26-01-2015)

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.

Occupy Central site in Causeway Bay was cleared as police moved in  ...

POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 42: 

Full coverage of the day’s events

Don't jump gun on suitable CE candidates, urges Fan

It is too early to name likely chief executive candidates who are patriotic, says Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai.

She was responding to remarks by Basic Law Committee member Albert Chen Hung- yee that pan-democrats stand a chance for the top job in the 2017 election if they opt for positions in government instead of confrontation.

Chen named Secretary for Housing and Transport Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, Undersecretary for the Environment Christine Loh Kung-wai and Executive Council member Anna Wu Hung-yuk as potential candidates who may qualify.

But Fan, a member of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, said it is too early to comment on suitability, as it remains uncertain whether the election reforms can pass hurdles set by pan- democratic lawmakers, who have pledged to veto the proposals in the Legislative Council.

"First we must have universal suffrage," said Fan, a former Legco president. "With universal suffrage, then we can talk about the nomination committee recommending its ideal candidates.

"It's too early to talk about who is suitable and who is not at this point in time. And of course the candidates themselves have to express that they wish to enter the contest."

Fan also declined to comment on Chen's choice of candidates.

She added that the candidates' test of patriotism has to go through "an objective sort of assessment" conducted by the public while taking into account the central authority's views.

At Legco yesterday, Loh declined to comment on Chen's remarks.

Democratic Party chairwoman Emily Lau Wai-hing questioned whether Chen is too obsessed with the issue when he personally "anoints" individuals he deems suitable.

Civic Party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit said the pan-democrats are not fighting for an equal and just election system so that they can be elected. If the election is fair, there will naturally be much now-hidden talent contending for the post, he said.





HKU students back vote on matter to quit

Two University of Hong Kong students running in upcoming Students' Union elections disagree with a proposal for the university to leave the Federation of Students. But they back a referendum on the issue.

Speaking at a forum hosted by the Hong Kong University Students' Union yesterday, the leader of the Smarties group, Michael Pang Cheuk-kei, said: "We're happy with a referendum, though we oppose leaving the federation. But we'll respect the result if students want to do so."

The leader of Ascent, Fung Jing-en, said the group has a similar stance: "We do not want to quit the federation. We should consider reforming it first."

The motion for the referendum was passed narrowly by the Students' Union Council last night. It will be held from February 9 to 13 simultaneously with the union elections.

The federation came under fire from two other student representatives from the HKU Independence group. They criticized its decisions and actions during Occupy Central, which they said included being too late in escalating action.

And an escalation on November 30 "should not have been only symbolic," representative Lee Kai-tik said.

Another representative, Ng Wai-ka said he had heard various students talk about boycotting the federation.

He also questioned why only one person the Federation of Students secretary-general, Alex Chow Yong- kang could represent all the students.

But Chow denied accusations at the forum that HKU was "restrained" by the federation. "The federation is an effective platform for different universities to communicate, and if HKU were to leave then the communication between it and other institutions should be mapped out clearly," he said.


The HKU Students' Union's current president, Yvonne Leung Lai-kwok, said while she is concerned about the representation in the federation, quitting will not resolve the problems.



Li warning may well be last reform call



Vice-president Li Yuanchao's ominous comment late last week that the good show has yet to come in wake of the Occupy Central movement has stirred up lots of discussion.

What could he mean indeed?

Li reportedly made the remark while meeting representatives of returned migrants.

The mainland media was not at all specific about what Li probably meant, so the possible interpretations are wide open.

For Occupy point man Benny Tai Yiu-ting, however, it is a convenient occasion to snipe back at Beijing.

As he and two other co-founders were arrested for organizing the protest, Tai too pledged there would be more good shows to come in the legislature as well as on the streets.

This tit for tat is nothing more than an attempt to be confrontational.

Legislative Council president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing read it differently, saying Beijing would take further action to stop any major issue arising in Hong Kong should it feel threatened.

Whatever the interpretation, it's time to be pragmatic again. What's important is to see universal suffrage implemented in 2017; otherwise, it would spell a vicious cycle for the SAR.

In starting the second stage of consultation on political reform, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor urged the opposition to seize the opportunity it presented.

It is a sensible appeal in the present context.

Time may prove to be running out for the ponderous thoughts that are needed for this multifaceted issue.

The consultation is already in the fourth week of the two-month exercise and legislators will be expected to vote on the 2017 chief executive electoral reforms this year.

Opposition lawmakers must make up their mind as to whether it will be better to have limited democratic reform than nothing at all.

Tai said the struggle will continue. However, what is the goal of the struggle?

In planning Occupy a year ago, the purpose was clear. Tai's idea was to use it as a bargaining chip to force Beijing to give Hong Kong greater democracy. The tactic has failed.

It is foreseeable that President Xi Jinping, who is ruling the country with an iron fist, is not going to yield to pressure.

If the opposition doesn't seize the opportunity, it's very likely there really will be nothing at all.

A so-called blank vote option - which gives voters a "none-of-the- above" alternative - that is being advocated by Basic Law Committee member Albert Chen Hung-yee is worth looking into.

The pro-democracy movement has pledged to stop the government getting from its camp the four votes that it needs to pass the reform package. At times, I doubt if Beijing will bother even trying to win the four votes at all.

For, at best, Beijing is half-hearted about the reform after all that has happened. At worst, it no longer bothers whether it will be passed or not. Some even suspect Beijing may be delighted if the reform is rejected by the opposition.

The opposition's assumption that the government is keen to negotiate may be nothing more than a false premise.


It is time for the opposition to weigh the pros and cons seriously. There is nothing ambiguous about Beijing's position. Although Li's remark may be open to interpretation, the signal may not be: it is a hint of a tougher stance to come.