Thousands of Hong Kong students start week-long boycott

[s002wjh]

Why would you assume that there is a price to be paid for being democratic?

as many americans said "Freedom is never free" look at arab spring, syria, egypt, french revolution, american revolution, iraq etc etc. there is always a cost.

 

[s002wjh]

To all our Chinese forum buddies based in mainland China. How come you are all getting access to all this information? According to all our news sources the Great Firewall of China is in full swing. And I am not just talking about Western news sources (I've been listening to Al Jazeera for example) . Is Instagram censured? Facebook? etc. Where are you getting your information from?

No wisecracks about 50centers etc. I just genuinely want to know what is commonly and openly reported in the Mainland about the HK protests, and whether our reports in the outside world of censorship are correct.

in the age of cyberspace, nothing can be blocked 100%

 

[mylegend]

For all interested in real time update. A good website to start is �����Q�װ� discuss.com.hk - �@�ӭ����u�o�@�ӭ����Q�װ�
This is the biggest internet forum in HongKong. However, it is written in Chinese. Much if not all of the post include some Cantonese dialect. I can understand it as I am from the region, but you don't need to know it to understand majority of meaning.

Alexa - Top Sites in Hong Kong

Although I know this is the most popular forum in HK, but if anyone suspect, Alexa data prove this to be most visited forum in HK.

 

[tramp]

As if the totaletarian, dictatorship, autocracy, military rule etc do not have any cost. That is where you are wrong.

The examples you cited are transition societies.... talk of situation where democracy is in effect.

as many americans said "Freedom is never free" look at arab spring, syria, egypt, french revolution, american revolution, iraq etc etc. there is always a cost.

 

[s002wjh]

As if the totaletarian, dictatorship, autocracy, military rule etc do not have any cost. That is where you are wrong.

The examples you cited are transition societies.... talk of situation where democracy is in effect.

exactly its in transition, CCP is not a democratic country, a democratic revolution will has similar effect as soviet union break up or worst like syria civil was, that will throw china back for 50 years, all that economy, ppl livehood is gone etc etc ask chinese see if they prefer stability over revolution.

here is memoir of the interpreter for Deng Xiopeng

DENG ON GORBACHEV: "THIS MAN MAY LOOK SMART BUT IN FACT IS STUPID."

This brings us to Mikhail Gorbachev who visited China in May 1989.
At that time, there were two political forces in China. One the one hand, we had the students whose hero was Gorbachev, known for his prioritization of political reform. The students welcomed their hero with a slogan -- "Today's Soviet Union, Tomorrow's China" -- which was very appealing to China's intelligentsia.

On the other hand, we had Deng who believed that the most urgent task was to improve people's livelihood. In his view, all other reforms, including political ones, had to serve this primary goal. He believed that copying the Western model and placing political reform on the top of the agenda, like the Soviets were doing at the time, was utterly foolish. In fact, that was exactly Deng's comment on Gorbachev after their meeting: "This man may look smart but in fact is stupid."

Nevertheless, it is my conviction that the most important thing remains: The vast majority of the Chinese people today agree with Deng's viewpoint. Stability is supreme for a super big country like China. With a stable environment, some liberal economic policies have, and can, make a difference for at least 70 percent of the population. Step by step, that's how we have come this far.

My Personal Memories as Deng Xiaoping's Interpreter: From Oriana Fallaci to Kim Il-sung to Gorbachev | Zhang Weiwei

as for hongkong it never has free election, hence its in transition too. do you really think CCP will give in for the demands? if not what happen, hk stock drop 1000pts, cost 400million HK$ already, if thats not cost what is.

 

[s002wjh]

As if the totaletarian, dictatorship, autocracy, military rule etc do not have any cost. That is where you are wrong.

The examples you cited are transition societies.... talk of situation where democracy is in effect.

exactly its in transition, CCP is not a democratic country, a democratic revolution will has similar effect as soviet union break up or worst like syria civil was, that will throw china back for 50 years, all that economy, ppl livehood is gone etc etc ask chinese see if they prefer stability over revolution.

here is memoir of the interpreter for Deng Xiopeng

DENG ON GORBACHEV: "THIS MAN MAY LOOK SMART BUT IN FACT IS STUPID."

This brings us to Mikhail Gorbachev who visited China in May 1989.
At that time, there were two political forces in China. One the one hand, we had the students whose hero was Gorbachev, known for his prioritization of political reform. The students welcomed their hero with a slogan -- "Today's Soviet Union, Tomorrow's China" -- which was very appealing to China's intelligentsia.

On the other hand, we had Deng who believed that the most urgent task was to improve people's livelihood. In his view, all other reforms, including political ones, had to serve this primary goal. He believed that copying the Western model and placing political reform on the top of the agenda, like the Soviets were doing at the time, was utterly foolish. In fact, that was exactly Deng's comment on Gorbachev after their meeting: "This man may look smart but in fact is stupid."

Nevertheless, it is my conviction that the most important thing remains: The vast majority of the Chinese people today agree with Deng's viewpoint. Stability is supreme for a super big country like China. With a stable environment, some liberal economic policies have, and can, make a difference for at least 70 percent of the population. Step by step, that's how we have come this far.

My Personal Memories as Deng Xiaoping's Interpreter: From Oriana Fallaci to Kim Il-sung to Gorbachev�|�Zhang Weiwei

as for hongkong it never has free election, hence its in transition too. do you really think CCP will give in for the demands? if not what happen, hk stock already drop 1000pts, and cost 400million econmic dmg, if thats not cost what is.

 

[Compersion]

How PRC treats the other countries by way of combativeness and exploiting languages and interpretations into grey areas and taking advantage of ifs and buts ... The Hong kong people is doing the same onto PRC and CCP. Bitter medicine. Some-say it was a reasonable anticipatation and a known known.

Both sides have their justifications ... The constitution of Hong kong was designed to create conflict between Hong kong people and CCP and PRC agreed to it. A contract that has significant ifs and buts is not a good contract. The desire and objectives of the parties to the constituoon are also not one. It's a perfect conflict creation.

The pro-democracy camp petitioned the Hong Kong government and Beijing for the full implementation of universal suffrage as indicated in the Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45, which delineates the requirements for electing the chief executive.[5] Members also cited[citation needed]language in Annex I in support of universal suffrage:

" "The chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government.[6]" "

" "The method for selecting the chief executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.[6]" "

In December 2007, the National People's Congress Law Committee officially ruled on the issue of universal suffrage in Hong Kong:[7]

" that the election of the fifth chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2017 may be implemented by the method of universal suffrage; that after the chief executive is selected by universal suffrage, the election of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may be implemented by the method of electing all the members by universal suffrage... "

The Asia Times wrote in 2008 that both proposals for the Legislative Council (LegCo) and for the chief executive were "hedged in with so many ifs and buts that there is no guarantee of Hong Kong getting anything at all... "[8]

CY Leung, the incumbent chief executive of Hong Kong, was to submit the local government's recommendation to Beijing on how to proceed with democratisation in the territory following consultations. As of July 2014 a round of consultations ended in early 2014, and another round of consultations was to take place in the second half.[9] Chinese political leaders have since repeatedly declared that the chief executive, which is to be elected by universal suffrage in 2017, "must conform to the standard of loving the country and loving Hong Kong".[10] To that end, the government of Hong Kong, strongly backed by the PRC government, reiterated that CE nominees be screened by a "broadly representative nominating committee", and that there was no provision for civic nominations.[10] The position was reaffirmed in a State Council white paper from June 2014.[11]

Occupy Central with Love and Peace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is further language in constitution of Hong kong on freedom of speech, right to protest, etc the structure is designed to promote attention on article 45 and 68.

It is not about PRC budging but about conflict resolution where there is a clear conflict of language within the constitution of Hong kong between CCP and Hong kong people.

The CCP won't allow people of Hong kong too much say that alone nails it, some say even if Hong Kong people nominate (locally) and elect a leader why would they do one that will create suffering and more likely they will elect one that is in harmony with PRC and good for both. Why the fear from CCP.

Nomination comititee needs to be representative. The Parliament of Hong kong aims to have ALL its members by way of universal suffeage. The parliament of Hong kong can define and determine how the nomination comititee is representative and pass laws. The people of Hong kong will vote people into the parliament. Yet the questions and movement on parliament universal sufferrage will be done only after the leader selection by universal sufferage is clear. One can see a thread and pattern and its is leading to conflict.

Also It is a PRC territory and Taiwan is watching, that's why the current positions will be adjusted by both sides. They have to.

What happens when a contract and its performance are not achieved and contract is terminated. That's a fascinating question.

I don't see the local hong kong democratic group having the intelligence , knowledge and clear message to sustain against CCP ... Suppose that's why PRC and CCP say there is (risk) outside interference. Intelligence support. Already one can see different positioning. Also CCP might be willing to wait it out. It will be a test of will power from both sides.

Why was the language of the constitution of Hong kong not clear and simple And open to wide interpretations and debate and different choices and meanings and on what is at issue.

Three party to the agreement ... Uk, CCP, and Hong kong people.

 

[prohumanity]

Who is behind these pro democracy protests in Hong Kong? Is it the same entity who brought democracy to Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine recently ?

 

[SADAKHUSH]

have you been to china to see teens been bully by police? do you have crediable link that says teens are been bully by police in china? if not i rest my case.

what happen to HK wont decide future of china.

here we go again, everytime ppl cant take chinese opinon, they call chinese brainwash etc because they are from china. goto silicon valley, goto university in US, talk to chinese, youll know they are very smart/nationlism, but far from brainwash.

yes there are adult few hundred out of few thousands protester out of 7.2 million resident in HK.

there are time and place for protest, in HK(control by CCP), with that few, just look at arab spring, look at ukraine.
whos shot at? as far as i know only tear gas was used, and police withdraw later.
you can support them however you want, but its the HK resident losing out in term of economy.
No matter whos in charge of HK, he/she has to have a good relation with china, HK economy depend on it. guess what HK stock lose 500pts today.
its not i dont support democracy, i just dont think these kids think through. china is NOT gonna give in, and the final cost will be HK economy, they already start losing to singapore/shanhai, this just haste it. if you do some research youll know close to 50% HK resident prefer stability and against the student protest, the other 50% dont even bother to show up.

Have you heard of Internet digital age? It enables us to travel without leaving our hometown and the other source are is to watch documentaries filmed by Western news media.

The CCP was signatory to the agreement and they have obligation to honor the same. I am not talking about brainwashing of Chinese students in USA universities as you have tried to suggest. We have free and democratic society and no web sites are blocked or shut down because of paranoid officials. China's economy depends upon rest of the world. Manufacturing can be shifted to other countries as well. We use to import from Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan before China and we can go back to old days. We can and will support Hong Kong economy over China's any time. Do not underestimate our resolve. The protests based on merit succeed at last no matter how long it takes. Just finished watching the latest news and learned that young and old alike have joined the students as well.

Time will tell who blinks first.

 

[nimo_cn]

Have you heard of Internet digital age? It enables us to travel without leaving our hometown and the other source are is to watch documentaries filmed by Western news media.

The CCP was signatory to the agreement and they have obligation to honor the same. I am not talking about brainwashing of Chinese students in USA universities as you have tried to suggest. We have free and democratic society and no web sites are blocked or shut down because of paranoid officials. China's economy depends upon rest of the world. Manufacturing can be shifted to other countries as well. We use to import from Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan before China and we can go back to old days. We can and will support Hong Kong economy over China's any time. Do not underestimate our resolve. The protests based on merit succeed at last no matter how long it takes. Just finished watching the latest news and learned that young and old alike have joined the students as well.

Time will tell who blinks first.

Do you even know what the content of the agreement is?

in the joint declaration signed by PRC and UK in 1984, it states clearly that the chief executive of the future HK needs to be approved by Chinese central government before he fulfills its duty.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration

The Government of the HKSAR will be composed of local inhabitants but the chief executive will be appointed by the Central People's Government on the basis of the results of elections or consultations to be held locally, and he will nominate the principal officials. Furthermore the legislature of the HKSAR shall be constituted by elections.

the joint declaration never specifies how the elections are gonna be held. Chinese central government has a final say on how the executive will be elected.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

 

[angeldude13]

Evil CCP should give freedom and democracy to hongkongers......

 

[Ashutosh Lokhande]

We should support HK freedom movement. No people of a sane country would want to live under communist rule. Aspecially if that country has experienced freedom and liberty of dwmocracy.

 

[Compersion]

Do you even know what the content of the agreement is?

in the joint declaration signed by PRC and UK in 1984, it states clearly that the chief executive of the future HK needs to be approved by Chinese central government before he fulfills its duty.

Sino-British Joint Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


the joint declaration never specifies how the elections are gonna be held. Chinese central government has a final say on how the executive will be elected.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

I always wondered if ambiguity and not being specific and clear is done on purpose by CCP.

Some say it is also incompetence and unskillfulness on not anticipating future knowns.

It is seen in many areas:

Hong Kong Constitution
One China Principle
One China Policy
Shanghai Trade Zone
Taiwan
United Front (People's Republic of China)
Macau
Democratic Movement in Hong Kong
KMT
DPP
Hong Kong Dollar
Macau Dollar
Taiwan Dollar

For Advanced level:
Taiwan role in Hong Kong
Macau democratic movement (PRC>Hong Kong> Taiwan)

You ask about any of the above to people in PRC and leaders (CCP) one will get a different interpretation by the locals and the people. Heck even reading the below quote makes one want to hire a lawyer and look into mediation, arbitration and even adjudication (but from where??).

The Government of the HKSAR will be composed of local inhabitants but the chief executive will be appointed by the Central People's Government on the basis of the results of elections or consultations to be held locally, and he will nominate the principal officials. Furthermore the legislature of the HKSAR shall be constituted by elections.

It is pretty much similar in hong kong constitution but with more ifs and buts.

The problem with the above is that it can be read and interpreted in many ways. It is not specific and definite. Protest is a conflict resolution tool. The purpose and aim is to be peaceful and non-violent with the wish that CCP will understand like they did with Article 23. But the problem is the words and language can have different interpretation. Parliament supremacy is another area that might need to be discussed in hong kong.

Technically the final interpretation now is with Standing Committee of the National People's Congress of China (NPCSC) but what happens if that is not in tune with the locals. That is also a conflict creator. What about the Parliament of Hong Kong (with the aim that ALL its members elected by universal suffrage). One Country Two Systems the emphasis is on Two System when PRC is trying to emphasize One Country. Its difficult to resolve and the direction is also difficult to tune. The issue also is with Taiwan looking.

If one was speak to their close acquaintance and both read the same line on a document in different ways always ... sometimes the elder one gives a slap. sometimes the elder one comforts and try to explain. sometimes the younger one teaches the older generation. Welcome to PRC and the ambiguity of interpretation of being a Chinese.

When PRC leaders signed the document did they not think this is open to conflict and dispute.

PRC has population but that does not mean the others are not right. Both sides have their justifications.

Which side is good and which side is bad. Some say David vs Goliath and underdogs. And CCP leaders deep down know that message is good. It is a everlasting. Unless confronted by extreme violence.

The only positive for PRC at this moment is the Hong Kong Democratic leaders are a bit clueless on what they want and how. They seems to be reactive and also innocent. Thats why i see outside interference in guiding them and making the message clear and substantial and with meaning. I wont be surprise this becomes a emergency type situation like it happened in India in 1975 - 1977. But In India the leaders that went to jail knew what they were doing without outside interference. It takes courage and intelligence to look the authorities in the eye even with a gun pointed to the head and not move and without any violent reaction say take me to jail i believe in what i am doing.

Do Hong Kong people have and know this ... that is the beauty of the times we live in.

I would like the situation to be dealt with maturity and i am sure that will be the case since the CCP has many pragmatic leaders. The problem with the democratic movement in hong kong is again direction. but no one can doubt that both have justifications.

i wish everything has a good ending in hong kong for everyone and one country two system is strengthen later and more clear on future directions.

 

[Compersion]

A article that has one side of the story - the full article can be read on the following link:

BBC News - Hong Kong protests: Did China go back on its promises?

Mr Hoo, chairman of the Basic Law Institute and a well-known pro-Beijing figure in Hong Kong, is referring to Article 45 of the Basic Law, which refers specifically to one person, one vote.

"The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures," it says.

It is Beijing's conservative interpretation of that line that has brought tens of thousands of protesters onto the streets.

According to the rules announced at the end of August by the Standing Committee of China's parliament, candidates for chief executive must gain the support of a majority of a nominating committee.

There can be only two to three candidates.

CY Leung, the current chief executive, has further clarified that the nominating committee will be modelled on the existing election committee - composed of members largely loyal to Beijing - that selected him in 2012.

...

"The people on the streets are asking for the right to nominate," says Mr Hoo. "Universal suffrage, under the international covenant, means that there are express rights to elect or be elected. There is no express right to nominate."

This argument is disputed by those, including the former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten, who accuse the Chinese government of refusing to live up to its commitments by hiding behind flexible legal language.

Years before the then British colony was returned to China in 1997, a number of senior Chinese leaders had assured the Hong Kong public that one person, one vote would be in its future.

In a comment in the official People's Daily newspaper in March 1993, Lu Ping, then the director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, said: "How Hong Kong develops its democracy in the future is entirely within the autonomy of Hong Kong."

And in a letter written in May 1984, then Premier Zhao Ziyang promised university students in Hong Kong that protecting the people's democratic rights was a basic principle of the government.

He assured them that there would, someday, be democratic rule in Hong Kong.

But just five years later, Mr Zhao, a relatively liberal-minded leader, would be punished for siding with the student demonstrators on Tiananmen Square, spending the rest of his life under house arrest.

...

Ms Lau adds: "Whoever is elected by the Hong Kong people to be chief executive, I am quite sure that person would love China and love Hong Kong and would be able to defend the interest of the Hong Kong people and would also be able to work with Beijing.

"Such people exist. Just give us some space, so that they can be nominated. And allow the people to elect."

 

[nimo_cn]

A article that has one side of the story - the full article can be read on the following link:

BBC News - Hong Kong protests: Did China go back on its promises?



...



...

UK commentary on HK becomes more humorous! Last Governor HK Patten appears on BBC condemn HK authorities on insufficient "democracy". Who elected Patten - nobody !To see total lack of democracy need only look in mirror !http://t.cn/Rh3wtAU

the above comment was made by a British scholar on Chinese weibo.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

 

[SADAKHUSH]

Do you even know what the content of the agreement is?

in the joint declaration signed by PRC and UK in 1984, it states clearly that the chief executive of the future HK needs to be approved by Chinese central government before he fulfills its duty. the joint declaration never specifies how the elections are gonna be held. Chinese central government has a final say on how the executive will be elected.



Sino-British Joint Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

The Hong Kongers are demonstrating against the choice of candidates before election. The CCP wants to impose the list of candidates who can stand for election which is undemocratic and violates the very clause of the one you have quoted. The protesters are demanding that any one should be able to stand or become a candidate for election. I hope you can understand the difference in what protesters are asking and what you understand from the article of agreement.

 

[Compersion]

UK commentary on HK becomes more humorous! Last Governor HK Patten appears on BBC condemn HK authorities on insufficient "democracy". Who elected Patten - nobody !To see total lack of democracy need only look in mirror !Hong Kong protests: Students stage rally outside chief executive's office – as it happened | World news | The Guardian

the above comment was made by a British scholar on Chinese weibo.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

Do you mind to post the excerpts that you see are important and useful here. I dont have much comment on Chris Patten. But he has a voice and popularity apparently in hong kong. also what happen before 1997 is not persuasive since the current events are due to the wording of hong kong constitution and performance and achievement accordingly.

Also the role of UK is there according to Basic Law drafters and also the Sino-British Joint Declaration (for example why they gave up Hong Kong Island and Kowloon). Also these agreement being open to (language and interpretation) disagreement and conflict creation between Hong Kong people and CCP can be seen by the protests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Nanjing

The Qing government agreed to make Hong Kong Island a crown colony, ceding it to the British Queen "in perpetuity" (常遠, Cháng yuǎn, in the Chinese version of the treaty), to provide British traders with a harbour where they could unload their goods (Article III). Pottinger was later appointed the first governor of Hong Kong.

In 1860, the colony was extended with the Kowloon peninsula and in 1898, the Second Convention of Peking further expanded the colony with the 99-year lease of the New Territories. In 1984, the governments of the United Kingdom and the People's Republic of China (PRC) concluded the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong, under which the sovereignty of the leased territories, together with Hong Kong Island and Kowloon (south of Boundary Street) ceded under the Convention of Peking (1860), was transferred to the PRC on 1 July 1997.

When you have a agreement there is always a price - cost. To be reasonable do not blame the British only (although they have a role to play in the current events). Hong Kong Island and Kowloon could have continue to be under the British even after 1997 yet they passed them over to PRC in return for promises and by signing agreements that placed performance parameters in place and a cost-price to the parties.

Who is the hot chick in your profile pic. Is that your gf. Good man.

 

[nimo_cn]

The Hong Kongers are demonstrating against the choice of candidates before election. The CCP wants to impose the list of candidates who can stand for election which is undemocratic and violates the very clause of the one you have quoted. The protesters are demanding that any one should be able to stand or become a candidate for election. I hope you can understand the difference in what protesters are asking and what you understand from the article of agreement.

Actually they are the same thing, which is that the final decision on who is gonna be the chief executive rests with the central government.

People accused CCP of not observing the agreement, I post of article of the joint declaration to show you that what the HK students are asking for is not specified in the agreement and is totally unfounded.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

 

[nimo_cn]

Do you mind to post the excerpts that you see are important and useful here. I dont have much comment on Chris Patten. But he has a voice and popularity apparently in hong kong. also what happen before 1997 is not persuasive since the current events are due to the wording of hong kong constitution and performance and achievement accordingly.

Also the role of UK is there according to Basic Law drafters and also the Sino-British Joint Declaration (for example why they gave up Hong Kong Island and Kowloon). Also these agreement being open to (language and interpretation) disagreement and conflict creation between Hong Kong people and CCP can be seen by the protests.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Nanjing



When you have a agreement there is always a price - cost. To be reasonable do not blame the British only (although they have a role to play in the current events). Hong Kong Island and Kowloon could have continue to be under the British even after 1997 yet they passed them over to PRC in return for promises and by signing agreements that placed performance parameters in place and a cost-price to the parties.

Who is the hot chick in your profile pic. Is that your gf. Good man.

What happened before 1997 is very important given that UK is trying to get involved in the issue 17 years after they relinquished HK.

You might be misguided to believe that British are really concerned about HK's democratic progress when the last British HK governor condemned China for not giving HK full democracy. however, British had ruled HK for over 150 years, democracy was the last thing they were willing to give HK. every HK governor was appointed by the queen, and none of them were from HK. history of HK has demonstrated that British don't give a damn about HK democracy, their chest thumping is pure hypocrisy.

every thing is the agreement has been or is being fullfilled in the last 17 years. China promised to maintain a highly autonomous HK, and that promise has been kept. UK, after the transfer of HK in 1997, is in no position to comment on the issue because it's none of her business.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

 

[SADAKHUSH]

Actually they are the same thing, which is that the final decision on who is gonna be the chief executive rests with the central government.

People accused CCP of not observing the agreement, I post of article of the joint declaration to show you that what the HK students are asking for is not specified in the agreement and is totally unfounded.

Sent from my HUAWEI P7-L07 using Tapatalk 2

We can have never ending debate on this issue, what matters how the local Hong Kongers and free world at large interpret the articles of agreement. I am posting the following for you to read several times before replying to my post. It seems to me you are twisting the facts to suit your thinking where as I am of different opinion.

The Government of the HKSAR will be composed of local inhabitants but the chief executive will be appointed by the Central People's Government on the basis of the results of elections or consultations to be held locally, and he will nominate the principal officials. Furthermore the legislature of the HKSAR shall be constituted by elections.

It says chief executive will be appointed by CCP on the basis of elections.

The demonstrators are fighting to retain the right to choose the candidates for the elections where as CCP wants to impose choice of candidates which is not part of agreement in the treaty. It does not matter what you or your CCP thugs say. Does it anywhere states that CCP will nominate the candidates for election if not than why CCP thugs cannot stick to the original spirit of the agreement instead of twisting it as you are doing by posting the posts?









Content of the Joint DeclarationEdit
Joint Declaration

The Sino-British Joint Declaration consists of eight paragraphs, three Annexes about the Basic Policies regarding Hong Kong, the Sino–British Joint Liaison Group and the Land Leases as well as the two Memoranda of the two sides. Each part has the same status, and "The whole makes up a formal international agreement, legally binding in all its parts. An international agreement of this kind is the highest form of commitment between two sovereign states."[7] Within these declarations the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be directly under the authority of the Central People's Government of the PRC and shall enjoy a high degree of autonomy except for foreign and defence affairs. It shall be allowed to have executive, legislative and independent judicial power, including that of final adjudication. The Basic Law explains that in addition to Chinese, English may also be used in organs of government and that apart from the national flag and national emblem of the PRC the HKSAR may use a regional flag and emblem of its own. It shall maintain the capitalist economic and trade systems previously practised in Hong Kong. The PRC declared that the basic policies regarding Hong Kong are as follows:

National unity and territorial integrity shall be upheld and a Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) shall be established.
The HKSAR will be directly under the authority of the Central People's Government of the PRC and will enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defence affairs.
It will be vested with executive, legislative and independent judicial power (including that of final adjudication) and the laws currently in force in Hong Kong will remain basically unchanged.

Not just the current social and economic system in Hong Kong will remain unchanged, also the life-style and 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 demonstration, of choice of occupation, of academic research and of religious belief, inviolability of the home, the freedom to marry, the right to raise a family freely. Those will be ensured by law as well as the private property, ownership of enterprises, legitimate right of inheritance and foreign investment.
The Hong Kong Special Administration Region will retain the status of a free port and a separate customs territory. It can continue the free trade policy, including free movement of goods and capital.
The HKSAR will retain the status of an international financial centre with free flow of capital and the Hong Kong dollar remaining freely convertible. The HKSAR may authorise designated banks to issue or continue to issue Hong Kong currency under statutory authority.
It will have independent finances with its own budgets and final accounts, but reporting it to the Central People's Government. Additionally the Central People's Government will not levy taxes on it.
The HKSAR may establish mutually beneficial economic relations with the United Kingdom and other countries.
The name used for international relations will be 'Hong Kong, China'. In doing so it may maintain and develop economic and cultural relations and agreements with states, regions and relevant international organisations on its own and it may issue travel documents for Hong Kong. International agreements to which the PRC is not a party but Hong Kong is may remain implemented in the HKSAR.
The government of the HKSAR is responsible for the maintenance of public order. Military forces sent by the Central People's Government, stationed in HKSAR, for the purpose of defence shall not interfere in the internal affairs in the HKSAR.
Those basic policies will be stipulated in a Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the PRC by the National People's Congress and will remain unchanged for 50 years.

The Government of the United Kingdom will be responsible for the administration of Hong Kong with the object of maintaining and preserving its economic prosperity and social stability until 30 June 1997 and the Government of the PRC will give its co-operation in this connection.

Furthermore this declaration regulates the right of abode, those of passports and immigration. All Chinese nationals who were born or who have ordinarily resided in Hong Kong for a continuous period of seven years or more are qualified to obtain permanent identity cards. Those cardholders can also get a passport of the HKSAR, which is valid for all states and regions. But the entry into the HKSAR of persons from other parts of China shall continue to be regulated in accordance with the present practice.
The PRC's basic policies regarding Hong Kong (Annex I)

This Annex is called the Elaboration by the government of the People's Republic of China of its basic policies regarding Hong Kong. It is partly mentioned in the summary above and deals in detail with the way Hong Kong will work after 1 July 1997. The annexe consist of following sections: (1) Constitutional arrangements and government structure; (II) the laws; (III) the judicial system; (IV) the public service; (V) the financial system; (VI) the economic system and external economic relations; (VII) the monetary system, (VIII) shipping, (IX) civil aviation; (X) education; (XI) foreign affairs; (XII) defence, security and public order; (XIII) basic rights and freedoms; (XIV) right of abode, travel and immigration.
Sino-British Joint Liaison Group (Annex II)

Annex II set up the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group. That Group came into force at 1 July 1988 and continued its work until 1 January 2000. Its functions were

a) to conduct consultations on the implementation of the Joint Declaration
b) to discuss matters relating to the smooth transfer of government in 1997
c) to exchange information and conduct consultations on such subjects as may be agreed by the two sides.[8]

This Group was an organ for liaison and not of power, where each side could send up to 20 supporting staff members. It should meet at least once in each of the three locations (Beijing, London and Hong Kong) in each year. From 1 July 1988 onwards it was based in Hong Kong. It should also assist the HKSAR to maintain and develop economic and cultural relations and conclude agreements on these matters with states, regions and relevant international organisations and could therefore set up specialist sub-groups. Between 1985 and 2000 the Joint Liaison Group held 47 plenary meetings whereof 18 were held in Hong Kong, 15 in London and 14 in Beijing.

One of the main achievements had been to ensure the continuity of the independent judiciary in Hong Kong, including agreements in the areas of law of Merchant Shipping, Civil Aviation, Nuclear Material, Whale Fisheries, Submarine Telegraph, Outer Space and many others. Furthermore it agreed to a network of bilateral agreements between Hong Kong and other countries. Within those agreements were reached on the continued application of about 200 international conventions to the HKSAR after 30 June 1997. Hong Kong should also continue to participate in various international organisations after the handover.
Land Leases (Annex III)

According to the Land Leases all leased lands, granted by the British Hong Kong Government, which extend beyond 30 June 1997 and all rights in relation to such leases shall continue to be recognised and protected under the law of the HKSAR for a period expiring not longer than 30 June 2047. Furthermore a Land Commission shall be established with equal number of officials from the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the PRC which was dissolved on 30 June 1997. This commission was established in 1985 and met in Hong Kong for 35 formal meetings and agreed on 26 legal documents, within the granting of the land required for the new airport at Chek Lap Kok in 1994 .
United Kingdom Memorandum

In this memorandum the Government of the United Kingdom declared that all persons who hold British Dependent Territories citizenship (BDTCs) through an affiliation with Hong Kong would cease to be BDTCs on 1 July 1997. After the declartion, the Hong Kong Act, 1985 and the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order, 1986 created the category British National (Overseas). BDTCs were allowed to apply for British National (Overseas) status until July 1997, but this status does not in of itself grant the right of abode anywhere, including the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. After the handover, most former BDTCs became citizens of the People's Republic of China. Any who were ineligible for PRC citizenship and who had not applied for BN(O) status automatically became British Overseas citizens.
See also: British nationality law and Hong Kong and British nationality law
Chinese Memorandum

"Under the National Law of the PRC, all Hong Kong Chinese compatriots, whether they are holders of the 'British Dependent Territories Citizens' Passport' or not, are Chinese nationals." Those people who use travel documents issued by the Government of the United Kingdom are permitted to use them for the purpose of travelling to other states and regions, but they will not be entitled to British consular protection in the HKSAR and other parts of the PRC.
CommentariesEdit

The signing of the Joint Declaration by the Conservative Party government of Margaret Thatcher was a cause of controversy in Britain at the time: some were surprised that the right wing Prime Minister would agree to such an arrangement with the Communist government of China represented by Deng Xiaoping. But, as stated in the notes of The Hong Kong Baptist University: "The alternative to acceptance of the present agreement is to have no agreement."[9] Some[who?] were surprised that Hong Kong residents were not given full UK citizenship. The Joint Declaration would also have to have been signed by HM Queen Elizabeth II and the President of China, Li Xiannian.[citation needed]

However, many commentaries pointed out that Britain was in an extremely weak negotiating position. Hong Kong was not militarily defensible and received most of its water and food supply from Guangdong province in mainland China. It was therefore considered economically infeasible to divide Hong Kong, with Britain retaining control for Hong Kong Island and Kowloon while returning the New Territories to the PRC in 1997, if no agreements could be reached by then. As mortgages for property in Hong Kong were typically fifteen years, without reaching an agreement on the future of Hong Kong in the early 1980s, it was feared that the property market would collapse, causing a collapse of the general economy in Hong Kong. Constraints in the land lease in the New Terrorities were also pressing problems at that time. In fact, while negotiation concerning the future of Hong Kong had started in the late 1970s, the final timing of the Declaration was related to the land and property factors.

Some commentaries pointed out that the British Government had no interest in granting full British citizenship to Hong Kong Chinese residents. In fact, the British Government changed its nationality laws just a few years before the signing of the Sino–British Joint Declaration to ensure that Hong Kong Chinese residents would not get the right to live in Britain in future.

But on the other hand, Wu Bangguo, the chairman of the National People's Congress Standing Committee stated in a conference in Beijing 2007, that "Hong Kong had considerable autonomy only because the central government had chosen to authorize that autonomy".[10]
AftermathEdit

After signing of the declaration, the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group was set up according to the Annex II of the declaration.

The transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong (referred to as the "return" or "handover" by the Chinese and British press respectively) occurred as scheduled on 1 July 1997. Since the return just a few things changed, such as the flag of Hong Kong, the Prince of Wales Building being renamed into the People's Liberation Army Building. Post boxes were repainted green, as per the practice in China. Street names have remained unchanged and the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club has kept its "Royal" prefix, although the Hong Kong Jockey Club and other institutions have given up this title.[11]

After the Asian financial crisis in 1997 the Hong Kong measures were taken with the full co-operation of the Chinese government. This did not mean that the Chinese government dictated what to do and therefore still follows the points of the declaration.[12]

Despite the autonomy, the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region sometimes sought the suggestions from the Chinese government. In 1999 the government of the HKSAR asked China's State Council to seek an interpretation of a provision in the Basic Law by the National People's Congress Standing Committee. The Chinese government said that a decision by Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal would allow 1.6 million mainland immigrants to enter Hong Kong. As a result the Chinese authorities obliged and the Hong Kong judgment was overturned.[clarification needed][13]

Pressures from the mainland government were also apparent, for example in 2000, after the election of pro-independence candidate Chen Shui-bian as Taiwan's president, a senior mainland official in Hong Kong warned journalists not to report those Taiwan independence news. Another senior official advised businessmen not to do business with pro-independence Taiwanese.[13]

With this and other changes,[13] ten years after the return, in 2007, The Guardian wrote that on the one hand, "nothing has changed since the handover to China 10 years ago",[14] but this was in comparison to the situation before the last governor Chris Patten had introduced democratic reforms three years before the handover. Now, the Guardian continued, a chance for democracy had been lost as Hong Kong had just begun to develop three vital elements for a western-style democracy (the rule of law, official accountability and a political class outside the one-party system) but the Sino–British deal had prevented any of these changes to continue.