DOCSLIB.ORG

OFFICIAL RECORD of PROCEEDINGS Thursday, 26 June

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 9305 OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Thursday, 26 June 2008 The Council continued to meet at Nine o'clock MEMBERS PRESENT: THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE MRS RITA FAN HSU LAI-TAI, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN IR DR THE HONOURABLE RAYMOND HO CHUNG-TAI, S.B.S., S.B.ST.J., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LEE CHU-MING, S.C., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LUI MING-WAH, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MARGARET NG THE HONOURABLE MRS SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE BERNARD CHAN, G.B.S., J.P. 9306 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS SOPHIE LEUNG LAU YAU-FUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG, G.B.S. THE HONOURABLE WONG YUNG-KAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE HOWARD YOUNG, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE YEUNG SUM, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU CHIN-SHEK, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU KONG-WAH, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHOY SO-YUK, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW CHENG KAR-FOO THE HONOURABLE TIMOTHY FOK TSUN-TING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LI FUNG-YING, B.B.S., J.P. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 9307 THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE AUDREY EU YUET-MEE, S.C., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, M.H. THE HONOURABLE LEE WING-TAT THE HONOURABLE LI KWOK-YING, M.H., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, J.P. THE HONOURABLE DANIEL LAM WAI-KEUNG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JEFFREY LAM KIN-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG HOK-MING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, B.B.S. THE HONOURABLE RONNY TONG KA-WAH, S.C. THE HONOURABLE CHIM PUI-CHUNG 9308 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 PROF THE HONOURABLE PATRICK LAU SAU-SHING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT JINGHAN CHENG, J.P. THE HONOURABLE KWONG CHI-KIN THE HONOURABLE TAM HEUNG-MAN THE HONOURABLE MRS ANSON CHAN, G.B.M., J.P. MEMBERS ABSENT: THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, J.P. PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING: THE HONOURABLE HENRY TANG YING-YEN, G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION THE HONOURABLE JOHN TSANG CHUN-WAH, J.P. THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY THE HONOURABLE WONG YAN-LUNG, S.C., J.P. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL SUEN MING-YEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK MA SI-HANG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THE HONOURABLE STEPHEN LAM SUI-LUNG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 9309 THE HONOURABLE AMBROSE LEE SIU-KWONG, I.D.S.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY DR THE HONOURABLE YORK CHOW YAT-NGOK, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH THE HONOURABLE DENISE YUE CHUNG-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE THE HONOURABLE TSANG TAK-SING, J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE PROF THE HONOURABLE K C CHAN, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY THE HONOURABLE MRS CARRIE LAM CHENG YUET-NGOR, J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT THE HONOURABLE EDWARD YAU TANG-WAH, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THE HONOURABLE EVA CHENG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING PROF LAU SIU-KAI, J.P. HEAD, CENTRAL POLICY UNIT CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE: MR RICKY FUNG CHOI-CHEUNG, J.P., SECRETARY GENERAL MRS VIVIAN KAM NG LAI-MAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MS PAULINE NG MAN-WAH, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL 9310 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): A quorum is lacking as there are only 22 Members in the Chamber. Clerk, please ring the bell. (After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members entered the Chamber) PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): A quorum is now present. The meeting now starts. BILLS Council went into Committee. Committee Stage CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Committee stage. Council is now in Committee. REVENUE BILL 2008 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): As requested by Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, the Committee will deal with clauses 7 and 10 and other clauses separately. I now propose the question to you and that is: That the following clauses stand part of the Revenue Bill 2008. CLERK (in Cantonese): Clauses 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 11 to 19. CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any Member wish to speak? (No Member indicated a wish to speak) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 9311 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you and that is: That the clauses stand part of the Bill. Will those in favour please raise their hands? (Members raised their hands) CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands. (No hands raised) CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I think the question is agreed by a majority of the Members present. I declare the motion passed. CLERK (in Cantonese): Clause 7. CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any Member wish to speak? MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): Madam Chairman, the reason I have applied to single out this clause so that Members could vote on it separately is that I wish to urge Members to object to the proposed clause 7. Well, what is clause 7 all about? It is very simple. Clause 7 proposes to lower the standard rate of salaries tax by 1%, from 16% to 15%. I urge Members to support my amendment. Yesterday, we already put forward the relevant justifications. Actually, the reason is simply to manifest the "ability to pay" principle. The Secretary said yesterday that this is unfair ― unfair to "the kings of employees" ― including himself. I do not know whether he was airing his own grievances, but how will this be unfair? The reason he gave was that as the rate of salaries tax has been reverted to the 2002-2003 level for everyone, if this is not applied to them, it would be unfair to them. 9312 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 26 June 2008 I think this claim has disregarded a basic fact, and that is, there is already "extremely, extremely, extremely great inequity" in Hong Kong, meaning that the distribution of resources in Hong Kong as a whole is so unequal that most of Hong Kong's wealth is owned by a very small group of people, with the top 10% alone owning 40% of the wealth. This is the situation in Hong Kong and it is extremely, extremely, extremely unfair. What I am now doing is to make this "extremely, extremely, extremely great inequity" a little bit more equitable, only just a little bit more so, but the Secretary said that this is unfair to them. To say that this is unfair to them is only making this "extremely, extremely, extremely great inequity" (that is, the problem of disparity between the rich and the poor) even more serious. Thus, the Secretary's complaint about "unfairness" is actually indicative of his neglect of the "great inequity". I hope everyone could see that the Secretary's claim is unjustified. On the other hand, I have listened to Mr Ronny TONG's explanation. He said his friends think that there is no reason to punish those who are financially successfully and there is no reason to exclude them from the tax reduction. Moreover, even though they are punished, it does not necessarily mean that it will benefit the poor. This is what they claimed. Mr Ronny TONG said that he did not have an answer for his friends, but I think the question is very easy to answer. Mr Ronny Tong himself has also mentioned that the position of the Civic Party is that those who have the ability should pay more, and the current proposal is only to give effect to the "ability to pay" principle. Under the existing tax system, the marginal tax rate is set at 17%. According to the current proposal of the Government, taxpayers are only required to pay taxes up to 15% of their salaries as opposed to the original 16%. If we have no objection to it, then the rate of salaries tax will be revised from 16% to 15%, but I think if the rate can continue to be pitched at 16%, the "ability to pay" principle could be better manifested.
Recommended publications
  • Switzerland and Hongkong Strengthen Their Cooperation in Financial Markets

    Switzerland and Hongkong Strengthen Their Cooperation in Financial Markets

    Switzerland and Hong Kong strengthen their cooperation in financial markets On 23 January 2018, Federal Councillor Ueli Maurer and Mrs Carrie Lam, Chief Executive of Hong Kong SAR, met in Bern to strengthen bilateral cooperation in the area of financial markets and to exchange views on international financial and tax matters. Authorities and private sector representatives from Hong Kong and Switzerland signed three Memorandums of Understanding (MoU) during the meeting. During their meeting, Switzerland's Federal Councillor Ueli Maurer and Hong Kong's Chief Executive Mrs Carrie Lam discussed topics including the further development of the two financial centres, the opportunities arising from the opening-up of the financial markets in Mainland of the People’s Republic of China, developments in the fintech sector and international tax issues. They also reaffirmed their commitment to further enhance bilateral collaboration to promote the healthy development of the financial services industry in and between Switzerland and Hong Kong. Hong Kong and Switzerland held an official financial dialogue for the first time in September 2017, during which the two places agreed to further formalise bilateral financial collaboration. Three MoUs were signed today. The first MoU, signed by Norman Chan, Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), and Jörg Gasser, Head of the Swiss State Secretariat for International Financial Matters (SIF), serves as the basis for regular financial dialogue and sets out the parties' willingness to strengthen financial markets cooperation, including in the area of RMB internationalisation, wealth management, infrastructure financing and international financial matters. The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) also signed an MoU with the HKMA to enhance fintech collaboration with a view to facilitating financial innovation in the two places.
  • On the Election of the Chief Executive in Hong Kong

    On the Election of the Chief Executive in Hong Kong

    - 1 - Viktor Ungemach: On the Election of the Chief Executive in Hong Kong. Head of Government or Lieutenant of Beijing? The election of the Chief Executive held in Hong Kong on March 25, 2007 was the third to take place since the crown colony was returned to the People's Republic of China and transformed into a so-called special administrative region (SAR). Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, the former head of government, emerged victorious with 649 of 796 votes, whereas Alan Leong Kah-kit, his challenger from the pro-democratic camp, obtained only 123 votes. Although his programme hardly differed from that of his opponent, Mr Tsang was favoured from the start in the elections, which were accompanied by a public campaign for the first time. Their opinions differed only on the question of introducing universal suffrage, which was strongly advocated by Mr Leong. Properly speaking, the basic law of Hong Kong provides for the election of the Chief Executive to take place in 2007 and that of the Legislative Council in 2008. However, the realisation of these two projects was later predicated on current developments within the SAR, leaving Beijing sufficient scope for influencing Hong Kong politics. When the People's Republic of China said that Hong Kong's population lacked experience in dealing with democracy, it prompted discontent among that population, causing a record number of 500,000 people in the SAR to take to the streets in 2004 and, moreover, initiating the formation of several political parties that demand democracy. However, as their only common denominator was the call for a swift realisation of universal suffrage, the clout of the pro-democratic camp remained weak.
  • Hong Kong's Endgame and the Rule of Law (Ii): the Battle Over "The People" and the Business Community in the Transition to Chinese Rule

    Hong Kong's Endgame and the Rule of Law (Ii): the Battle Over "The People" and the Business Community in the Transition to Chinese Rule

    HONG KONG'S ENDGAME AND THE RULE OF LAW (II): THE BATTLE OVER "THE PEOPLE" AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IN THE TRANSITION TO CHINESE RULE JACQUES DELISLE* & KEVIN P. LANE- 1. INTRODUCTION Transitional Hong Kong's endgame formally came to a close with the territory's reversion to Chinese rule on July 1, 1997. How- ever, a legal and institutional order and a "rule of law" for Chi- nese-ruled Hong Kong remain works in progress. They will surely bear the mark of the conflicts that dominated the final years pre- ceding Hong Kong's legal transition from British colony to Chinese Special Administrative Region ("S.A.R."). Those endgame conflicts reflected a struggle among adherents to rival conceptions of a rule of law and a set of laws and institutions that would be adequate and acceptable for Hong Kong. They unfolded in large part through battles over the attitudes and allegiance of "the Hong Kong people" and Hong Kong's business community. Hong Kong's Endgame and the Rule of Law (I): The Struggle over Institutions and Values in the Transition to Chinese Rule ("Endgame I") focused on the first aspect of this story. It examined the political struggle among members of two coherent, but not monolithic, camps, each bound together by a distinct vision of law and sover- t Special Series Reprint: Originally printed in 18 U. Pa. J. Int'l Econ. L. 811 (1997). Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School. This Article is the second part of a two-part series. The first part appeared as Hong Kong's End- game and the Rule of Law (I): The Struggle over Institutions and Values in the Transition to Chinese Rule, 18 U.
  • Hong Kong E-News Bulletin January 3, 2018

    Hong Kong E-News Bulletin January 3, 2018

    Hong Kong e-News Bulletin January 3, 2018 HONG KONG NEWS Co-operation Arrangement for XRL co-location arrangement The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) approved the Co- operation Arrangement between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) on the Establishment of the Port at the West Kowloon Station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) for Implementing Co-location Arrangement (Co-operation Arrangement) on December 27, 2017. HKSAR Government welcomes the decision made by NPCSC. The Chief Executive, Mrs Carrie Lam, said that this signified the accomplishment of the second step in the "Three-step Process" to provide a firm legal basis for the implementation of co-location arrangement at the West Kowloon Station (WKS). Mrs Lam further noted that there is no more doubt that co-location arrangement at the WKS to enable passengers travelling on the XRL to complete clearance procedures of both Hong Kong and the Mainland at the station in one go is the best way to optimise the transport, economic and social benefits of the XRL. This arrangement has received majority support in the community. Construction works of the Hong Kong Section of the XRL, which started in 2010, are now roughly 98 per cent completed. The Mass Transit Railway Corporation Limited is confident to commission this very important piece of railway project in the third quarter of 2018. The HKSAR Government will strive to introduce the Bill to implement co-location arrangement at the WKS pursuant to the NPCSC's Decision and the approved Co- operation Arrangement into LegCo no later than early February 2018.
  • A Case Study of Hong Kong SAR and Its Implications to Chinese Foreign Policy

    A Case Study of Hong Kong SAR and Its Implications to Chinese Foreign Policy

    Paradiplomacy and its Constraints in a Quasi-Federal System – A Case Study of Hong Kong SAR and its Implications to Chinese Foreign Policy Wai-shun Wilson CHAN ([email protected]) Introduction Thank for the Umbrella Movement in 2014, Hong Kong has once again become the focal point of international media. Apart from focusing the tensions built among the government, the pro-Beijing camp and the protestors on the pathway and the pace for local democratization, some media reports have linked the movement with the Tiananmen Incident, and serves as a testing case whether “One Country, Two Systems” could be uphold under the new Xin Jinping leadership.1 While academics and commentators in Hong Kong and overseas tend to evaluate the proposition from increasing presence of Beijing in domestic politics and the decline of freedoms and rights enjoyed by civil society,2 little evaluation is conducted from the perspective of the external autonomy enjoyed by Hong Kong under “One Country, Two Systems”. In fact, the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the subsequent Basic Law have defined and elaborated the scope of Hong Kong’s autonomy in conducting external relations ‘with states, regions and relevant international organizations.’ 3 It is therefore tempted to suggest that the external autonomy enjoyed by Hong Kong SAR Government serves as the other pillar of “One Country, Two Systems”, giving an unique identity of Hong Kong in global politics which may be different from that possessed by mainland China. Though officially “One Country, Two Systems” practiced in Hong Kong (and Macao) is not recognized by Beijing as a federal arrangement between the Central People’s Government and Hong Kong SAR Government, the internal and external autonomy stipulated in the Basic Law gives Hong Kong similar, to some extent even more, power as a typical federated unit.
  • Beijing's Visible Hand

    Beijing's Visible Hand

    China Perspectives 2012/2 | 2012 Mao Today: A Political Icon for an Age of Prosperity Beijing’s Visible Hand Power struggles and media meddling in the Hong Kong chief executive election Karita Kan Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/5896 DOI: 10.4000/chinaperspectives.5896 ISSN: 1996-4617 Publisher Centre d'étude français sur la Chine contemporaine Printed version Date of publication: 4 June 2012 Number of pages: 81-84 ISSN: 2070-3449 Electronic reference Karita Kan, « Beijing’s Visible Hand », China Perspectives [Online], 2012/2 | 2012, Online since 30 June 2012, connection on 15 September 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/ 5896 © All rights reserved Current affairs China perspectives Beijing’s Visible Hand Power struggles and political interventions in the 2012 Hong Kong chief executive election KARITA KAN ong Kong’s next chief executive was revealed on 25 March 2012, reignited frenzied probes into Tang’s extra-marital affairs and added fuel to when the 1,193-member election committee, made up largely of incriminating remarks about his dishonesty, infidelity, and “emotional fault” Hbusiness leaders, professionals, and influential persons loyal to Bei - (ganqing queshi 感情缺失 ). jing, voted in majority for Leung Chun-ying. Leung defeated his main op - Commentator Willy Lam Wo-lap and Open University computing profes - ponent, former chief secretary for administration Henry Tang Ying-yen, by sor Li Tak-shing both raised the alarm that these “black materials” ( hei cailiao garnering 689 votes over the 285 that Tang received. The third candidate, 黑材料 ) might in fact have come from national security and intelligence Democratic Party chairman Albert Ho Chun-yan, secured only 76 votes.
  • HONG KONG: the PERILS of SEMIDEMOCRACY William H

    HONG KONG: the PERILS of SEMIDEMOCRACY William H

    Overholt.new created saved from e-mail by JB on 7/2/01. (6682 words.) PRE created from NEW by SL on 7/ 18. TXT created from NEW w/ PJC edits on 8/1/01(5644 w/notes); JB edits to TXT entered 8/7, PJC (5683 wds. w/notes). PRE revised with TXT by SL on 8/7. MP changes to TXT by PJC on 8/9/01(5750 words w/ notes); Aas to TXT 8/16, PJC (6149 wds w/notes). PRE revised with TXT by SL on 8/24. PGS created from PRE by SL on 8/24. HONG KONG: THE PERILS OF SEMIDEMOCRACY William H. Overholt William H. Overholt is head of Asia strategy and economics for Nomura International, a Japan-based securities firm with offices in Hong Kong and around the world. He holds a doctorate in political science from Yale University and is the author of five books, including most recently The Rise of China: How Economic Reform Is Creating a New Superpower (1994). At the time of Hong Kong’s 1997 transition from British to Chinese rule, the world saw the city as a laissez-faire enclave that took care of itself, while an able but mostly hands-off civil service did minor maintenance. A successful transition would mean little more than a changing of the guard, with local functionaries replacing colonial functionaries. There was, in this widely held view, no need for any larger reform of the economy or polity. Beijing and London, together with the local business establishment, planned a government that they all hoped would combine representative deliberativeness with authoritarian decisiveness.
  • Six-Monthly Report on Hong Kong 1 January €“ 30 June 2009 Cm 7694

    Six-Monthly Report on Hong Kong 1 January €“ 30 June 2009 Cm 7694

    Six-monthly Report on Hong Kong 1 July – 31 December 2009 Cm 7812 £5.50 Six-monthly Report on Hong Kong 1 July – 31 December 2009 Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty February 2010 Cm 7812 £5.50 © Crown Copyright 2010 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please contact the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected]. ISBN: 9780101781220 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID P002349986 02/10 1848 19585 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. FOREWORD This is the twenty-sixth in a series of reports to Parliament on the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong. It covers the period from 1 July to 31 December 2009. This period has seen the 25th anniversary of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong. This international treaty, which set out Hong Kong's rights and freedoms and established the basis for the large measure of autonomy which Hong Kong enjoys, has stood the test of time.
  • Anson Chan Fang on Sang

    Anson Chan Fang on Sang

    The Honourable Anson Chan Fang On Sang Anson Maria Elizabeth Chan Fang On Sang GBM GCMG (hon.) CBE, JP (traditional Chinese: 陳方安生) was a member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong for Hong Kong Island, succeeding the late legislator Ma Lik. Before running for Legislative Council, she served as the head of Hong Kong's civil service before and after the territory's handover to the People's Republic of China from British colonial rule. Noted for her poise and smile, she was the first woman and the first Chinese to hold the second-highest governmental position in Hong Kong. Chan joined the Civil Service in 1962 as an administrative service cadet, one of only two women to join the civil service at that time. Her salary was reportedly one-quarter that paid to men of equivalent grade. She progressed to the Economics Section of the Finance Branch in 1962, followed by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, then the Department of Commerce and Industry, and later back to Finance. In 1970, she became assistant financial secretary in the finance branch of the Colonial Secretary, the first woman to attain that post. Chan became the first female civil service director when appointed Director of Social Welfare in 1984. From 1987 to 1993, she was Secretary for Economic Services, becoming the 30th and last Chief Secretary in 1993. Chan was the first woman and the first ethnic Chinese to hold the second-highest governmental position in Hong Kong. The highest governmental position, the Governor, was always held by Britons before Hong Kong's handover to People's Republic of China.
  • ENCROACHMENTS on PRESS FREEDOM in HONG KONG Threatened Harbor Encroachments on Press Freedom in Hong Kong

    ENCROACHMENTS on PRESS FREEDOM in HONG KONG Threatened Harbor Encroachments on Press Freedom in Hong Kong

    THREATENED HARBOR ENCROACHMENTS ON PRESS FREEDOM IN HONG KONG Threatened Harbor Encroachments on Press Freedom in Hong Kong January 16, 2015 © PEN American Center 2015 All rights reserved PEN American Center is the largest branch of PEN International, the world’s leading literary and human rights organization. PEN works in more than 100 countries to protect free expression and to defend writers and journalists who are imprisoned, threatened, persecuted, or attacked in the course of their profession. PEN America’s 3,700 members stand together with more than 20,000 PEN writers worldwide in international literary fellowship to carry on the achievements of such past members as James Baldwin, Robert Frost, Allen Ginsberg, Langston Hughes, Arthur Miller, Eugene O’Neill, Susan Sontag, and John Steinbeck. For more information, please visit www.pen.org. Cover photograph: © Gareth Hayes, Creative Commons CONTENTS Introduction 4 Report Framework and Methodology 6 Legal Framework 7 Challenges to Press Freedom in Hong Kong 9 Physical Assaults on Journalists 9 Attacks on and Obstruction of Media During the Pro-Democracy Protests 11 Threats to Free Expression Online 14 Politically Motivated Censorship and Removal of Media Figures 17 Politically Motivated Economic Pressures on Media Outlets 20 Recommendations 22 References 23 Appendix: Alleged Incidents of Violence Against Journalists During the 2014 Pro-Democracy Protests As Reported to the Hong Kong Journalists Association 23 INTRODUCTION Hong Kong has long enjoyed a vibrant, diverse, and independent passed in 1990 by the Chinese National People’s Congress, also media and a unique position as a window into mainland China. explicitly protects the rights of Hong Kong’s residents through Local and foreign correspondents make use of Hong Kong’s the year 2047, including the freedom of speech, freedom of unique geopolitical position, cosmopolitanism, and strong the press, and freedom of assembly.
  • Fair Comment, Judges and Politics in Hong Kong

    Fair Comment, Judges and Politics in Hong Kong

    —M.U.L.R- Cottrell_finalproof.doc — Title of Article — printed 04/22/03 at 12:35 PM — page 33 of 32 FAIR COMMENT, JUDGES AND POLITICS IN HONG KONG ∗ JILL COTTRELL [Until recently, the Hong Kong courts assumed that the defamation defence of fair comment may be defeated by proof of malice — meaning improper motive. The Court of Final Appeal, through Lord Nicholls, recently held that only proof that the defendant did not genuinely hold the opinion expressed can defeat this defence. This article places this decision in the context of debates about the role and rule of law, and the judiciary in Hong Kong. More specifically, it defends the Court in the face of criticism that the decision is an unheralded and unwarranted imposition on the common law of Hong Kong. This article therefore analyses the development of the defence of fair comment, in the common law world as well as in Hong Kong, especially as it concerns the notions of ‘fairness’ and ‘malice’.] CONTENTS I Introduction...............................................................................................................33 II Politics of Transition and the Hong Kong Courts .....................................................35 III Fair Comment, Honesty and Fairness .......................................................................37 IV The Hong Kong Courts and Freedom of Expression................................................41 V Defamation Litigation in Hong Kong .......................................................................43 VI Fair Comment and the Hong
  • One Country, Two Legal Systems (Crowley Report)

    One Country, Two Legal Systems (Crowley Report)

    ONE COUNTRY, TWO LEGAL SYSTEMS? TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1 A. Overview .....................................................................................................................................3 I. PRESERVING THE RULE OF LAW.............................................................................................4 A. The Rule of Law..........................................................................................................................5 1. General International Standards...............................................................................................5 2. The Sino-British Joint Declaration ..........................................................................................7 B. Implementing International Commitments: Hong Kong and the Basic Law ............................8 C. The Right of Abode Decisions ..................................................................................................10 1. Background ............................................................................................................................10 2. The Court of Final Appeal’s Decisions .................................................................................12 a. Article 158: The Reference Issue......................................................................................12 b. Articles 22 and 24 of the Basic Law..................................................................................15