By Emily Lau


One of Hong Kong’s most outspoken and popular politicians, Emily Lau leads The Frontier party.

Recently, Hong Kong people had reminders of a disgraceful chapter in contemporary Chinese history – the Cultural Revolution. Launched by Chairman Mao Zedong in 1966 as part of a power struggle, that national disaster ended only when Mao died 10 years later.

Many Hong Kong people hold devastating memories of the Cultural Revolution, in which millions of people perished. What prompted discussion of this horrific saga was the maltreatment of Democratic Party legislator Martin Lee for writing an article in The Wall Street Journal.

In the mid-October article, Mr Lee called on US President George W. Bush and other world leaders to use next year’s Olympic Games in Beijing to “press for a significant improvement of basic human rights…including press, assembly and religious freedoms”.

The first salvos against Mr Lee came in a Legislative Council debate from members of a pro-Beijing political party, the DAB. Party chairman Tam Yiu-chung and former chairman Tsang Yok-sing deemed it inappropriate for Mr Lee to ask world leaders to press China for political reforms through direct engagement. They said the leaders in Beijing have raised this issue many times and that Mr Lee’s words validated their concerns about external forces interfering in Hong Kong affairs.

The fierce attacks against Mr Lee were disconcerting and alarming. What he wrote obviously touched a raw nerve. His attackers wanted to warn Hong Kong people that they can’t talk to foreign powers about China’s awful human-rights record without the risk of devastating consequences.

Apart from being attacked by pro-Communist and pro-business politicians, Mr Lee faced harassment outside Legco by sycophantic, pro-Communist supporters who called him a “traitor” and “running dog”. These vicious attacks received wide news coverage, whipping up hatred and frenzy. Then the nasty campaign most resembled the Cultural Revolution.

Incensed, members of The Frontier party saw the attacks on Mr Lee as a flagrant attempt to undermine freedom of expression, one of Hong Kong’s core values. So we went to the DAB headquarters to protest. But our protest and other actions in support of Mr Lee received little news coverage. Apparently, attacks on Mr Lee are big news. Protests against the pro-Communist forces undermining free speech aren’t. Such is the parlous state of the news media.

To no one’s surprise, Hong Kong’s government is oblivious to such disturbing developments. The chief secretary for administration, Henry Tang, said that free speech has not deteriorated since 1997. In fact, he claimed it has improved. Otherwise Mr Lee’s remarks couldn’t be publicized.

That’s laughable. Mr Tang should examine the 2007 annual report of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, which says the space for dissenting voices is narrowing. In January, the HKJA conducted a survey and found that 58 per cent of the journalist respondents believed press freedom has deteriorated. They attribute this to media self-censorship and tighter government control on the flow of information.

The media watchdog Reporters without Borders placed Hong Kong 58th among 168 jurisdictions in its 2006 press-freedom rankings. In 2002, Hong Kong had ranked 18th. Another organisation, Freedom House, placed Hong Kong 66th on its press-freedom list, beside Chile, Namibia, Benin and South Korea.

Mr Lee’s assailants claim to exercise free speech, but I doubt if that allows them to unjustly condemn people as traitors and running dogs.

Several years ago, I came under severe attack by the pro-Communist camp for having the audacity to say that on the future of Taiwan, I respect the wishes of the Taiwanese people. Someone threw excrement at the door of my Sha Tin ward office and made a huge mess. I complained to the police and was told the culprit had exercised freedom of expression. To me, it was criminal intimidation. Later, the man was fined HK$1,000. For littering, he would have been fined $500 more.

Mr Lee told the news media that his words were wrongly translated into Chinese to imply that he advocated a boycott of the Olympics. Some people used the wrong translation to assail him. That’s much like how the Cultural Revolution began.

As The Frontier protested at the DAB headquarters, we said the DAB remarks had triggered a series of Cultural Revolution-style attacks on Mr Lee. We warned that emotions ran high and didn’t want to see anyone injured or property damaged.

With regret, I learned that DAB chairman Tam Yiu-chung requested police protection after receiving an apparent death threat with sinister references to his wife and family. I condemn such disgraceful behavior and urge the police to investigate thoroughly. I hope that all the senseless attacks will end and cool heads prevail.

In the past, Hong Kong was a free city, albeit without democratic government. Since a big protest march when more than 500,000 people took to the streets on July 1, 2003, freedoms of expression and of the press have come under severe pressure from Beijing.

Previously, a relatively free press provided certain checks and balances, but those are disappearing fast. Ten years after the change of sovereignty, the pro-Communist forces believe they can do more to curb the people’s free speech, especially if it involves criticizing Beijing.

With the stock market having surged, some people may doubt the need to worry about free speech. But the essence of “one-country, two-systems” is that Hong Kong people can maintain the freedoms they enjoyed under British colonial rule. Alas, that no longer seems true.

Even while condemning the Chinese and British governments for reneging on their promises in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, we must redouble efforts to safeguard our basic human rights. We need to remind everyone that Cultural Revolution-style attacks have no place in Hong Kong.

ARCHIVES