SCMP, June 18, 2003
THE BENDING of rules and use of tactical manoeuvres to achieve an important political target is part and parcel of life in any legislature. US Senator Strom Thurmond, who recently retired at the age of 102, provided a notable example in 1957 when he spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes without a break to prevent a civil rights law being passed.
While such a marathon effort has never been seen in Hong Kong, our Legislative Council is not unaccustomed to the playing of political games. But the tactics adopted have, in the last week, taken a very dangerous course. On Saturday, pro-government legislators took advantage of the absence of their democrat rivals to rush through the clause-by-clause examination of the bill which will introduce new national security laws. They then took the unprecedented step of passing a binding motion forbidding the re-opening of this process, clearly aimed at preventing their missing opponents from participating once they returned.
This was followed on Monday by another disturbing development. This time a motion was passed which effectively bans further discussion in the current Legco session of whether the chief executive should be directly elected in 2007. Again, it broke new ground. The motion was passed by pro-government legislators, including those of the Liberal Party and Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong, in order to prevent what, no doubt, they regard as premature discussion of Hong Kong's possible democratic reforms. The government is not intending to consult the public on this issue until next year at the earliest.
In both cases, questions arise as to whether the gagging motions breach Legco's rules of procedure. It may well be that the president of the legislature, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, will ultimately be called upon to decide. But the more important question concerns the credibility and, indeed, the future of our Legislative Council. It has at times, with some justification, been dismissed as a mere talking-shop.
Now, certain legislators seem to want to curb the extent to which they can even talk. The gagging motions come at a particularly sensitive time. The national security legislation, required by Article 23 of the Basic Law, will probably be passed next month, bringing with it concerns that Hong Kong's freedoms will be eroded. By seeking to stifle debate in the Legislative Council chamber itself, the lawmakers concerned risk sending out the message that the so-called 'chilling effect' of the laws is making its mark. Both motions were passed when only a small number of legislators were present. But their impact is just as keenly felt.
