Opinion | Did Carrie Lam choose to follow her conscience and unite Hong Kong protesters against Beijing on purpose?

Could a chief executive so careful about national security legislation not have predicted the public response to the extradition bill? Is it possible that she was pushing back against pressure from Beijing to bend its way?

Reading Time:3 minutes

Anti-government demonstrators take part in a protest in Edinburgh Place in Hong Kong on December 30. Photo: Reuters

Published: 6:00am, 8 Jan 2020Updated: 9:03am, 8 Jan 2020

Now that a new year has dawned, let’s reflect deeply on the deeds of Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor over the past year.

Many have vilified Lam for moving the infamous, since-withdrawn, extradition bill and subsequently refusing to respond to the demands of the protesters. Others have ridiculed her as insensitive, incompetent and clueless.

I, too, believed Lam was dancing to Beijing’s tune rather than serving Hong Kong. But I now begin to wonder if those conclusions weren’t too simplistic. Look at the events closely and ask again: is Lam indeed insensitive and clueless, or has she been fighting a quiet battle against the central authorities?

First, let’s recognise this was the girl who, in May 1978, at the height of student protests at Precious Blood Golden Jubilee Secondary School, marched with her fellow Hong Kong University students to Government House. More recently, as the second-in-command to her predecessor Leung Chun-ying, Lam had experience working for a communist regime.

With this experience, she must surely have weighed her decision before repeatedly saying in 2016 she was not interested in the top job. However, she was later persuaded to stand for selection, after the central government apparently decided she would be more trustworthy than other contenders, including former financial secretary John Tsang Chun-wah.

We must also remember that, once Lam threw her hat into the ring, she declared she would be in no rush to enact national security legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law. She was evidently mindful that she should not restart something that would not go down well with the public.