The emergence and transformation of self-determination claims in Hong Kong and Catalonia: A historical institutionalist perspective

Ethnicities ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
André Lecours ◽  
Jean-François Dupré
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regional Autonomy ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
1997 Handover ◽  
The One

Using a historical institutionalist framework emphasizing the importance of transformative events, this paper seeks to explain the sudden emergence of self-determination claims in Hong Kong and their transformation into separatist ones in Catalonia. The paper argues that the inflexibility of the state in addressing moderate demands for regional autonomy has played a major role in the emergence and radicalization of these demands. In Hong Kong, the 1997 Handover from British to Chinese sovereignty was originally presented as an opportunity for self-governance under the principle of “Hong Kong People ruling Hong Kong” and the “One Country, Two Systems” formula. If Hong Kong nationalism was practically unheard of in the early years of the Handover, the unconciliatory attitude of the central government towards moderate demands for the actualization of the autonomy and democratization frameworks vested in Hong Kong’s Basic Law has directly contributed to the formation of today’s emerging self-determination movement. In Catalonia, the 2010 decision of the Spanish Constitutional Court to annul some articles of the reform to the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia and to interpret others narrowly represented a transformative event that took Catalonia onto the pathway of secessionist politics. The secessionist turn was then further fed by the on-going refusal of the central government to negotiate with the Catalan government, notably on the notion of a popular consultation on the political future of the Autonomous Community.

Prototype Constitutional Supervision in China: The Lessons of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric C. IP
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Constitutional Interpretation ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Party State

AbstractRecurrent proposals to establish a constitutional supervisory committee have been pertinaciously rejected in spite of widespread recognition of the Chinese Constitution’s ineffectiveness. And yet, the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee has long epitomized in practice a prototypic form of constitutional supervision. Vested with quasi-judicial competences, the Committee seemed destined for a central role under the “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement. The tight secrecy imposed on its proceedings and the suppression of its potential to act consistently and with a distinct identity have fatally undermined the Committee’s ability to modulate constitutional tensions by way of coordinating expectations of the Basic Law’s proper meaning. The experience of the Basic Law Committee reveals the recalcitrance of the Party-state toward constitutional interpretation by any specialized body, even one whose powers are heavily circumscribed and whose membership is tightly controlled.

Canaries or Colonials? The Reduced Prominence of the ‘Overseas Judges’ on Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Stuart Hargreaves
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
The Status ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Systems Framework ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Typically one member of a sitting panel of Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal is a senior jurist drawn from another common law jurisdiction. In the Court's early years, these ‘overseas judges’ were responsible for writing approximately one quarter of the lead opinions across a vast range of cases. This article demonstrates, however, that this practice has changed. The overseas judges now write a smaller share of lead opinions and no longer write lead opinions related to issues of fundamental human rights or the relationship between Hong Kong and the rest of China. This article suggests this change has been made for good reason. Though valid questions about the legitimacy of the role of the overseas judges can be made, they also continue to perform a valuable communicative role regarding the status of Hong Kong's judicial independence under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework. A recent rise in attacks on overseas and other ‘foreign’ judges in Hong Kong can be understood as part of a broader project that seeks to constrain the role of the independent judiciary. By continuing to invite overseas judges to sit on the Court of Final Appeal but reducing their public prominence, the Court has sought not only to reduce avenues for attacks on the legitimacy of particular decisions, but to protect the autonomy and independence of the judiciary more broadly.

scholarly journals "Patriots Governing Hong Kong" and the Innovation of Practice Path to Cultivate the Chinese National Community Consciousness

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Liao ◽  
Li Meng
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Special Administrative Region ◽  
National Community ◽  
Administrative Region ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Basic Meaning ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One

The basic meaning of "patriots ruling Hong Kong" is that Hong Kong people who love China and love Hong Kong govern Hong Kong society to ensure the smooth implementation of the "One Country, Two Systems" system and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in Hong Kong and maintain the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong society.

scholarly journals Protests Decentralised: How technology enabled civil disobedience by Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protesters

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janis Wong
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Civil Disobedience ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
Frame Work ◽  
Closing The Gap ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters

The proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assis- tance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 (2019年逃犯及刑事事宜相互法律協助法例(修訂)條例草 案) (FOMLA) by the Hong Kong government, aimed at closing the gap for extradition to Taiwan, Macau, and Mainland China, sparked dozens of city-wide protests as demonstrators feared it would erode Hong Kong’s legal system, including rights to privacy and data protection, under the Hong Kong Basic Law (HKBL).Facilitated by technology, the leaderless, decentralised demonstrations furthered the anti-extradition bill protests by establishing legitimacy, participation, trust, and privacy be- tween citizens under the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ frame- work. Based on these themes, this paper assesses how Hong Kong protesters found novel uses of technology such as Tele- gram, Apple Airdrop, cash and untraceable transactions, LIHKG Forum, and protest livestreams to self-organise, demon- strate their support for the movement, and maintain its mo- mentum. The protesters’ use of technology also shaped Twit- ter, Facebook, and Youtube policies, removing bot accounts and state-sponsored disinformation from their platforms.Learning from the city’s past protests, arrests, and convic- tions, this paper illustrates how Hong Kong protesters trans- formed their use of technology as a means to protect their personal identities, preserve their rights enshrined under the HKBL, and strive for democratic freedoms.

Constitutional Competition Between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee: A Game Theory Perspective

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (04) ◽  
pp. 824-848 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric C. Ip
Keyword(s):  
Game Theory ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Constitutional History ◽  
Standing Committee ◽  
British Rule ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
People's Congress

The competition between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, a cosmopolitan common law supreme court, and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee, a Leninist parliamentary body, over the “proper meaning” of the Hong Kong Basic Law constituted a very important facet of the territory's constitutional history since the end of British rule in 1997. This article applies the insights of game theory to explain why constitutional stability, in the sense that the two players have never entered into an open collision with each other despite the ambiguity of the Basic Law and the “One Country, Two Systems” formula, endured until the present day. It is argued that successful coordination between the two resulted from the strong aversion of the Court and the Standing Committee to constitutional crises, as well as from the fact that neither entity was capable of credibly signaling its commitment to an aggressive strategy all the time.

CROSS-BOUNDARY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL UNDER “ONE COUNTRY, TWO SYSTEMS”: PERSPECTIVES FROM HONG KONG–GUANGDONG COLLABORATION

2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (03) ◽  
pp. 601-625
Author(s):  
TING YIN TIFFANY WONG ◽  
YUAN XU ◽  
YOUNGHO CHANG
Keyword(s):  
Air Pollution ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Pollution Control ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Necessary Conditions ◽  
Air Pollution Control ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
Effective Collaboration

This study aims to examine how “One Country, Two Systems” has shaped and influenced the collaboration on cross-boundary air pollution control between the governments of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Guangdong province. The presence of the Chinese central government significantly fostered the start of this collaboration, but the implementation and collaborative relationship were relatively weak and unsustainable due to the two local governments’ largely different interests, goals and political demands. We found that the emphasis on “One Country” especially after 2003 led to the signature of more joint agreements in comparison with what the emphasis on “Two Systems” did between 1997 and 2003. Joint agreements appear to be necessary conditions for effective collaboration, but too many of them without satisfying implementation could have resulted in less concrete benefits. A balanced stress on “One Country” and “Two Systems” might bring an appropriate number of joint agreements with good implementation for more effective collaboration.

Jie Huang: Interregional Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tan Lee Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The Us ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One

AbstractReview of “Interregional Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments” by Professor Jie Huang (Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2014) which analyses the status quo of judgment recognition and enforcement in the Mainland China, Macao and Hong Kong under the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ regime. The book also presents a comparative study of the interregional recognition and enforcement of judgments in the US and EU.

Budget oversight in territorial autonomies: A comparative analysis of Hong Kong and Macao

2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232110338
Author(s):  
Brian C.H. Fong
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Survey Methodology ◽  
State Level ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Systems Model ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The Media ◽  
The One

Traditionally, comparative budgeting scholars have focused on analysing budget oversight at the sovereign state level. Budget oversight at the territorial autonomy level remains largely under-investigated. Drawing on the Open Budget Survey methodology, this study is a pioneering attempt to compare the budget oversight institutions and practices in Hong Kong and Macao under the ‘one country, two systems’ model. This study finds that the varying practices of budget oversight of Hong Kong and Macao are the consequence of their different bases of opposition politics, including democratic opposition, the media and civil society. This study extends the research focus of existing comparative budgeting literature from sovereign states to territorial autonomies. Thus, it has important implications for budget oversight analysis and policy worldwide. Points for practitioners This article uses comparative studies of Hong Kong and Macao to illustrate how different bases of opposition politics have led to varying practices of budget oversight. For policymakers, the lesson from the comparative studies is that the rise of democratic opposition, the media and civil society will bring about pressures for budget oversight. More policy learning is necessary for policymakers across democracies and semi-democracies to share the experiences of handling the politics of budget oversight.

Postscript

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tan See Kam
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Contemporary Society ◽  
Republican China ◽  
Peking Opera ◽  
Mise En Scene ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Chinese Democracy

Peking Opera Blues presents a jiegu fengjin metafiction to the 1980s Hong Kong of the film’s making and release. This is done by Tsui Hark evoking a past (Republican China), that draws on historical hindsights for allegorizing lessons of history with respect to colonial Hong Kong’s post-1997 future under the “one country, two systems” provision. While Peking Opera Blues does not have an explicit agenda for exerting pressure on the powers that be and for swaying public opinion in favor of democracy as an alternative to political China’s authoritarianism, it is nevertheless a commentary on the long, unsuccessful, march to Chinese democracy and its impact on contemporary society, most especially Hong Kong. Tsui Hark achieves this by particular forms of editing and mise en scène, and also by referencing Chinese cultural forms such as Peking opera, mandarin duck and butterfly fiction, the “three-women” films, and Canto-pop and Mandarin songs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document