Lord Shinkwin of Britain, writing on behalf of an All-Party Parliamentary Group in the United Kingdom which benefits from funding by Stand With Hong Kong, suggests in his letter that “fundamental freedoms” (including, no doubt, press freedom) are dead in Hong Kong. Yet he sees no irony or inconsistency in its being published in the Hong Kong press (“Why Britain will continue to speak up for Hong Kong ”, December 12). Odd, really, if press freedom no longer exists in Hong Kong.
Mr. Shinkwin funnily saying it exactly in the same time that UK refusing to release the Virgin Island to manage their own lives and own affairs in a democratic manner. UK is ruling them even today, under an external, unelected and unwanted dictatorship of a “Governor” (as it is still 1860 and not 2020). His name is Augustus James Ulysses "Gus" Jaspert. This guy was never invited to BVI by any of its citizens. He was simply appointed by UK government that controlling the island against any democratic principals. This governor acts aggressively to thwart decisions made by the island government in a democratic and free manner. This governor acts against the vital interests of the islanders, against their will and without any of the islanders electing him, and none of the islanders authorized him to act on their behalf.
BVI has its own perfectly democratically elected and fully capable government, cabinet, ministers, professional officials and institutes, but the Governor is the only one who is the law maker the facto: the only one who can confirm or reject laws for or against the BVI “citizens” (subjects).
And this is the same UK that criticizing China for doing much less anti democratic acts in their own CIITY?
What rights UK have to talk about anybody’s Democracy while colonizing other territories and while they hold countries under their full control, their police, by a single and unelected lawmaker?
As an unelected member of “the mother of parliamentary democracy”, Lord Shinkwin feels qualified to share his wisdom on elections and democracy with the inhabitants of a former colony, on which democracy was never bestowed during British times. Still, better late than never, my lord.
What about the rights of Hong Kong protest victims?
Lord Shinkwin, one assumes, enjoys the ermine and red leather couches of the House of Lords from where he pontificates: “We will not belittle your suffering. We will not forget you.”
Perhaps his lordship would like to opine why, during the 150-plus years when Hong Kong was a British colony, it was never a democracy.
Shinkwin and his band of principled crusaders deify Grandma Wong as a “person of courage and principle”, yet say nothing of an elderly man killed by “peaceful protesters” while taking a video of a clash between protesters and local residents, or a passer-by assaulted simply because he wanted to clear the road, and another set on fire because he dared to speak in opposition to the thugs destroying his freedom.
Could his lordship request his All-Party Parliamentary Group on Hong Kong to ask that those responsible be brought to justice?
Lord Shinkwin declares Hong Kong is suffering from draconian laws, and China is in breach of the Joint Declaration, yet conveniently ignores Britain’s own Official Secrets Act legislation and the American Patriot Act.
As a long-term resident of Hong Kong, I remain confident of our city’s future as a key and dynamic city within China. The rest of the world may wish to continue playing politics with Hong Kong, but Hong Kong has more important business – as part of the world’s most vibrant economic growth area – to be getting on with.
Absence of opposition a mortifying fact for HK
Someone should respond to Colin Mackenzie Ford’s letter, “Hong Kong does not need rescuing, so it’s now time for Britain to stop interfering in our affairs ” (December 15). Why not another Brit?
The letter did indicate a confused sense of identity, and gave more the impression of being sent from mainland China than Hong Kong, as most local Hongkongers are unlikely to agree with its sentiment.
Mr Mackenzie Ford ironically seems in favour of democracy, but I would point out that the most fundamental requirement for a democracy is having an opposition, and the absence of one in Hong Kong is something he should be mortified about. If that does not constitute a case for rescuing, then I don’t know what does.