Advertisement
Hong Kong Basic Law
OpinionComment

Hong Kong people must understand the limits of their autonomy as a Chinese special administrative region

Alan Hoo says persistent opposition to NPC interpretations of the Basic Law – a national law – stems from mistaken ideas about the parameters of Hong Kong’s autonomy

Reading Time:5 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
Alan Hoo says persistent opposition to NPC interpretations of the Basic Law – a national law – stems from mistaken ideas about the parameters of Hong Kong’s autonomy
Alan Hoo
The deliberate distortion of the true parameters of our autonomy is an effort to destroy the trust and national connection with our country. Illustration: Craig Stephens
The deliberate distortion of the true parameters of our autonomy is an effort to destroy the trust and national connection with our country. Illustration: Craig Stephens
On November 7, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress issued an interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law. This article deals with the legal requirements for the oath of allegiance, which in any country is a matter of sovereign authority and responsibility. However, the interpretation was condemned by some sectors of the community as undermining the rule of law in Hong Kong.
Advertisement
It should be noted that the interpretation was triggered by the decision of the Legislative Council president in respect of invalidated oaths, and would have been made even without court proceedings. In refusing the two disqualified legislators’ leave to appeal, the Court of Appeal, in its judgment, pronounced that the authority of the NPC Standing Committee to interpret the Basic Law is “fully acknowledged and respected”, and that such an interpretation is binding on the courts. “This is the effect of the Basic Law implementing the ‘one country, two systems’ principle ... Both systems being within one country, the Standing Committee’s interpretation made in conformity with Article 158 under a different system is binding in and part of the system” in Hong Kong.

Watch: March in protest against the November 7 interpretation of the Basic Law

Hong Kong legal heavyweights warn against Beijing interpretations of Basic Law

NPC interpretations have persistently been characterised by pan-democrats as the mythical floods and monsters, attacking the fabric of Hong Kong’s autonomy. In this regard, there has been a complete misunderstanding of the limits of our autonomy and Beijing’s role in safeguarding its promise of “one country, two systems” contained in the Joint Declaration and promulgated under the Basic Law. The basis of the Joint Declaration is to guarantee that “the socialist system and policies shall not be practised in the Hong Kong special administrative region, and the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years”. This serves to guarantee Hong Kong’s “prosperity and stability”.
The strife with Beijing only serves to alienate Hong Kong from its own country

To avoid conflict and argument over whether the “previous capitalist system” was being maintained or eroded, “basic policies” were spelt out in the Joint Declaration to define the separate system in Hong Kong. These are the constituent building blocks of the “previous capitalist system” (the judicial system, economic and financial system, social and taxation system, transport system, for example), and were colloquially known as “a 1984 snapshot of Hong Kong”.

The Joint Declaration pledged that all these policies would be “stipulated in a Basic Law” to be passed by the NPC. Therefore, all the provisions of the Joint Declaration are justiciable under this mini constitution. In 1989, the final draft of the Basic Law was tabled and unanimously endorsed by the UK Parliament to be a true and accurate embodiment of all the basic policies in the Joint Declaration. Consequently, the NPC promulgated the final draft into the Basic Law on April 4, 1990.

A large number of important issues could not be considered and agreed in 1984 when the Joint Declaration was signed, or in 1990 when the Basic Law was promulgated. The work of the Joint Liaison Group continued right up to 2000 to supplement the basic policies. For example, the important issues of who has right of abode in Hong Kong was only agreed by the group in 1996 and implemented through local Hong Kong legislation in 1997. This was very important as it does not allow masses of mainland Chinese citizens to have a right of abode in Hong Kong post handover, unlike UK citizens during the colonial era.

Advertisement
Hong Kong people and concern groups rally in 2013 to demand right of abode for mainland-born citizens to allow for family reunions. Photo: Nora Tam
Hong Kong people and concern groups rally in 2013 to demand right of abode for mainland-born citizens to allow for family reunions. Photo: Nora Tam

Why Beijing saw fit to interpret Hong Kong’s Basic Law

Advertisement