Hong Kong’s leader has described a extradition bill that has prompted weeks of mass protests as “dead”, but held back from completely withdrawing it, drawing criticism from her opponents who have promised to return to the streets.
At a press conference, Carrie Lam used a Cantonese phrase to say the proposed legislation was “reaching the end of its life”. Her government suspended the progress of the bill after demonstrations last month.
In the city’s sharpest challenge to Beijing’s rule in decades, millions of Hong Kong residents have taken to the streets in opposition to legislation that would allow extraditions to China.
Many see the proposed law as an encroachment on the territory’s autonomy, promised under the “one country, two systems” principle established when the former British colony was returned to China in 1997. Critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite activists and political enemies to China.
“We suspended it and we have no timetable,” Lam said. “What I said today is not very different from before, but maybe people want to hear a very firm response … the bill has actually died. So people won’t need to worry that there will be renewed discussions on the bill in the current legislature.”
Protesters rejected her remarks and promised to continue the demonstrations. Figo Chan Ho-wun of the Civil Human Rights Front said: “I urge Carrie Lam not to use words to deceive us. Otherwise the Civil Human Rights Front will plan our next action.”
Joshua Wong, a student leader during the mass pro-democracy protests in 2014 and secretary general of the Demosisto party, said: “The core of this political movement is the demand for free elections, because all governance crisis stems from the political inequality. Protests continue.”
Hong Kong’s democratic struggles since 1997
1 July 1997: Hong Kong, previously a British colony, is returned to China under the framework of “one country, two systems”. The “Basic Law” constitution guarantees to protect, for the next 50 years, the democratic institutions that make Hong Kong distinct from Communist-ruled mainland China.
2003: Hong Kong’s leaders introduce legislation that would forbid acts of treason and subversion against the Chinese government. The bill resembles laws used to charge dissidents on the mainland. An estimated half a million people turn out to protest against the bill. As a result of the backlash, further action on the proposal is halted.
2007: The Basic Law stated that the ultimate aim was for Hong Kong’s voters to achieve a complete democracy, but China decides in 2007 that universal suffrage in elections for the chief executive cannot be implemented until 2017. Some lawmakers are chosen by business and trade groups, while others are elected by vote. In a bid to accelerate a decision on universal suffrage, five lawmakers resign. But this act is followed by the adoption of the Beijing-backed electoral changes, which expand the chief executive’s selection committee and add more seats for lawmakers elected by direct vote. The legislation divides Hong Kong's pro-democracy camp, as some support the reforms while others say they will only delay full democracy while reinforcing a structure that favors Beijing.
2014: The Chinese government introduces a bill allowing Hong Kong residents to vote for their leader in 2017, but with one major caveat: the candidates must be approved by Beijing. Pro-democracy lawmakers are incensed by the bill, which they call an example of “fake universal suffrage” and “fake democracy”. The move triggers a massive protest as crowds occupy some of Hong Kong’s most crowded districts for 70 days. In June 2015, Hong Kong legislators formally reject the bill, and electoral reform stalls. The current chief executive, Carrie Lam, widely seen as the Chinese Communist party’s favoured candidate, is hand-picked in 2017 by a 1,200-person committee dominated by pro-Beijing elites.
2019: Lam pushes amendments to extradition laws that would allow people to be sent to mainland China to face charges. The proposed legislation triggers a huge protest, with organisers putting the turnout at 1 million, and a standoff that forces the legislature to postpone debate on the bills. After weeks of protest, often meeting with violent reprisals from the Hong Kong police, Lam announced that she would withdraw the bill.
Others criticised Lam’s refusal to formally withdraw the bill. Lokman Tsui, who teaches journalism at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said: “‘Officially dead’ is not a legal or political term. So it’s still unclear whether it is withdrawn, and we can only assume it is not since she still has not said those words.”
Public opinion of Lam, a target of protesters who see her as a lackey for Beijing, has reached a new low and few trust her pledges.
One protester, who would only give his surname, Ip, said: “She said the bill is dead but in the legislative rules, there is only ‘postpone’ or ‘withdrawal’. I absolutely don’t trust her verbal promises.”
On Facebook, comments posted under a live stream of Lam’s speech were critical. One posted: “So stubborn … she said nothing! Just suspended!!” Another said: “We need withdrawal!”
Pronouncing the bill dead while not withdrawing it appears to be a political compromise. Lam, who ultimately answers to Beijing, described the government’s response as the result of “deliberations of the various concerns and factors” and a “practical measure for us to move ahead”.
She also refused several of the protesters’ key demands, including her resignation and an independent investigation into police wrongdoing. Protesters and residents have accused the police of using excessive force against demonstrators. Lam has made one concession, however: public discussions with student protesters. Previously she had only agreed to closed-door talks.
Claudia Mo, a pro-democracy lawmaker, said: “She is still trying hard to put up this strong leader face, refusing to succumb to the people … that could send a dangerous message to mainland dissent too. Lam thinks she can stop a hill fire using a garden hose, but the young are neither giving in, nor giving up.”
Why are people protesting?
The protests were triggered by a controversial bill that would have allowed extraditions to mainland China, where the Communist party controls the courts, but have since evolved into a broader pro-democracy movement.
Public anger – fuelled by the aggressive tactics used by the police against demonstrators – has collided with years of frustration over worsening inequality and the cost of living in one of the world's most expensive, densely populated cities.
The protest movement was given fresh impetus on 21 July when gangs of men attacked protesters and commuters at a mass transit station – while authorities seemingly did little to intervene.
Underlying the movement is a push for full democracy in the city, whose leader is chosen by a committee dominated by a pro-Beijing establishment rather than by direct elections.
Protesters have vowed to keep their movement going until their core demands are met, such as the resignation of the city’s leader, Carrie Lam, an independent inquiry into police tactics, an amnesty for those arrested and a permanent withdrawal of the bill.
Lam announced on 4 September that she was withdrawing the bill.
Why were people so angry about the extradition bill?
Beijing’s influence over Hong Kong has grown in recent years, as activists have been jailed and pro-democracy lawmakers disqualified from running or holding office. Independent booksellers have disappeared from the city, before reappearing in mainland China facing charges.
Under the terms of the agreement by which the former British colony was returned to Chinese control in 1997, the semi-autonomous region was meant to maintain a “high degree of autonomy” through an independent judiciary, a free press and an open market economy, a framework known as “one country, two systems”.
The extradition bill was seen as an attempt to undermine this and to give Beijing the ability to try pro-democracy activists under the judicial system of the mainland.
How have the authorities responded?
Beijing has issued increasingly shrill condemnations but has left it to the city's semi-autonomous government to deal with the situation. Meanwhile police have violently clashed directly with protesters, repeatedly firing teargas and rubber bullets.
Beijing has ramped up its accusations that foreign countries are “fanning the fire” of unrest in the city. China’s top diplomat Yang Jiechi has ordered the US to “immediately stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs in any form”.
Lily Kuo and Guardian reporter in Hong Kong
Hundreds of protesters clashed with police at the weekend as they blocked streets in the commercial district of Kowloon after a march earlier in the day. Six people were arrested. Activists accused authorities of using excessive force on demonstrators and journalists.
The crisis in Hong Kong has spread beyond the territory. China has criticised “British intervention” after the UK foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, stressed London’s support for Hong Kong’s freedom.
Last week, the outgoing US consul general, Kurt Tong, was barred by the US state department from giving a critical speech on government actions in Hong Kong for fear it would derail a temporary trade truce between Washington and Beijing, according to the Financial Times.
According to the report, citing people familiar with the matter, Tong had planned a “kick-ass” speech to be delivered on 2 July at the Asia Society in Hong Kong, describing Beijing’s growing influence over the territory. Instead, the speech was watered down and made off the record at the last minute.
On Tuesday Beijing criticised the pro-democracy Hong Kong singer Denise Ho after she called for the UN to remove China from the body’s human rights council for trying to erode the city’s autonomy.
Ho was repeatedly interrupted by a Chinese diplomat while she spoke at the UN on Monday. On Tuesday a foreign ministry spokesman told a press briefing Ho was “delusional” and had “overestimated herself”.
