Hong Kong Marchers Challenge Ban on Music, Voice Discontent
Hong Kong's annual July 1 parade featured some very public acts of civil disobedience in response to authorities' attempts to restrict an event famous for championing Hong Kong's freedom. (Song Xianglong/Epoch Times Staff ) Hong Kongs annual July 1 parade featured some very public acts of civil disobedience in response to authorities attempts to restrict an event famous for championing Hong Kongs freedom. At a rally after the parade outside the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Office, speakers expressed discontent over voting rights, the taking of private property, and the abuse of police power.
Since the handover of Hong Kong to the Chinese communist regime on July 1, 1997, a rally and parade has been held in Hong Kong. July 1 is a doubly significant dateit is also the anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The event has served as a protest against the CCPs rule of Hong Kong and a rallying point for Hong Kongers who wish to preserve the citys legacy of Western freedoms.
This year, police sought to restrict the freedoms that make the event possible. Included in new regulations for the parade were a ban on the parade goers gathering together at the end of the parademaking the rally at the parades end impossible to holdand a ban on music.
Since 2003 the July 1 event has been organized by the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF), which comprises 40 NGOs. An appeal by CHRF to the Appeal Board on Public Meetings and Processions led to a lifting of the new restrictions, except for the ban on music.
Parade goers would not accept the music ban, however, and several groups that marched in the parade on Friday braved possible arrest by playing music. Some of the marchers, calling themselves Artistic Citizens, wore mock police uniforms and played homemade instruments. The police did ! not inte rvene. One Hong Konger who was present says she thinks the police did nothing because there were just too many people.
The day before the police announced the restrictions, CHRF said they expected 50,000 to take part. Gary Fan, one of the parade organizers had responded to the new restrictions by saying, "We believe more Hong Kong people will be angry about [the restrictions]. More Hong Kong people will choose to stand up on July 1 to safeguard their rights.
Fan proved prophetic about the attendance. Organizers say more than 100,000 attended the parade.
Leading the parade as it left Victoria Park at around 3 p.m. were residents of the Hong Kong village Shek Kong. They were forced to relocate due to construction of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link and were protesting against forced real estate acquisition. Real estate hegemony has become an important issue in Hong Kong, where, as on the mainland, local governments are believed to favor developers at the expense of citizens with no economic clout.
Other organizations protested against the curriculum in Hong Kongs school system, which they consider brainwashing.
The marchers most serious demand was that Chief Executive Donald Tsang should resign. He is seen as ruling for the rich and has become the lightning rod for anger at soaring housing costs. Tsangs term expires June 30, 2012 and his approval rating is now at its lowest level since 2005.
Further erosion of Hong Kongs limited democracy is feared by Mrs. Anson Chan, a former Chief Secretary and annual participant in the march. At the rally, she berated the HKSAR authorities for pushing through without public consent a vacancy-filling mechanism for the Hong Kong Legislative Council, a measure she regards as depriving the public of its right to vote.
Martin Lee, former chairman of the Democratic Party, characterized this issue as one that insults the public intelligence, since vacancies would be filled without an election. He complaine! d that t he HKSAR authorities are following the direct orders of Beijings Liaison Office.
CHRF spokesman Lee Cheuk-yan stated that if the government refuses to listen to the people, then the people will have even more reason to be angry.
In the history of the July 1 parade in Hong Kong, the 2003 parade stands out. The Hong Kong authorities on orders from Beijing had put forward Article 23, an anti-subversion law that could be used to deny basic freedoms on the grounds of treason. The parade that year featured a huge turn outestimates of the attendance ranged from 350,000 to 1 million. With the Hong Kong public strongly opposed, Article 23 was defeated.
Since the handover of Hong Kong to the Chinese communist regime on July 1, 1997, a rally and parade has been held in Hong Kong. July 1 is a doubly significant dateit is also the anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The event has served as a protest against the CCPs rule of Hong Kong and a rallying point for Hong Kongers who wish to preserve the citys legacy of Western freedoms.
This year, police sought to restrict the freedoms that make the event possible. Included in new regulations for the parade were a ban on the parade goers gathering together at the end of the parademaking the rally at the parades end impossible to holdand a ban on music.
Since 2003 the July 1 event has been organized by the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF), which comprises 40 NGOs. An appeal by CHRF to the Appeal Board on Public Meetings and Processions led to a lifting of the new restrictions, except for the ban on music.
Parade goers would not accept the music ban, however, and several groups that marched in the parade on Friday braved possible arrest by playing music. Some of the marchers, calling themselves Artistic Citizens, wore mock police uniforms and played homemade instruments. The police did ! not inte rvene. One Hong Konger who was present says she thinks the police did nothing because there were just too many people.
The day before the police announced the restrictions, CHRF said they expected 50,000 to take part. Gary Fan, one of the parade organizers had responded to the new restrictions by saying, "We believe more Hong Kong people will be angry about [the restrictions]. More Hong Kong people will choose to stand up on July 1 to safeguard their rights.
Fan proved prophetic about the attendance. Organizers say more than 100,000 attended the parade.
Leading the parade as it left Victoria Park at around 3 p.m. were residents of the Hong Kong village Shek Kong. They were forced to relocate due to construction of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link and were protesting against forced real estate acquisition. Real estate hegemony has become an important issue in Hong Kong, where, as on the mainland, local governments are believed to favor developers at the expense of citizens with no economic clout.
Other organizations protested against the curriculum in Hong Kongs school system, which they consider brainwashing.
The marchers most serious demand was that Chief Executive Donald Tsang should resign. He is seen as ruling for the rich and has become the lightning rod for anger at soaring housing costs. Tsangs term expires June 30, 2012 and his approval rating is now at its lowest level since 2005.
Further erosion of Hong Kongs limited democracy is feared by Mrs. Anson Chan, a former Chief Secretary and annual participant in the march. At the rally, she berated the HKSAR authorities for pushing through without public consent a vacancy-filling mechanism for the Hong Kong Legislative Council, a measure she regards as depriving the public of its right to vote.
Martin Lee, former chairman of the Democratic Party, characterized this issue as one that insults the public intelligence, since vacancies would be filled without an election. He complaine! d that t he HKSAR authorities are following the direct orders of Beijings Liaison Office.
CHRF spokesman Lee Cheuk-yan stated that if the government refuses to listen to the people, then the people will have even more reason to be angry.
In the history of the July 1 parade in Hong Kong, the 2003 parade stands out. The Hong Kong authorities on orders from Beijing had put forward Article 23, an anti-subversion law that could be used to deny basic freedoms on the grounds of treason. The parade that year featured a huge turn outestimates of the attendance ranged from 350,000 to 1 million. With the Hong Kong public strongly opposed, Article 23 was defeated.
Related Articles
Read the original Chinese article.
chinareports@epochtimes.com
- Why the Chinese Communist Party Has Still Survived
- Chinese Spying Devices Installed on Hong Kong Cars (Video)
Read the original Chinese article.
chinareports@epochtimes.com
.jpg)
Comments