Updated: Aug 1, 2021
About 58% (2016 legislative council election) to 71% (2019 district council election) of Hong Kong voters vote for every election held in Hong Kong. The total amount of voters is 4,132,977 in 2019 according to Voter Registration Statistic. The number is almost equal with the number of the workers (labor force) in Hong Kong, 3,861,100 workers in April-June 2020 calculated by census and statistics department.
The main issue of opposition camp is that they are always divided into too many parties on the legislative council election not the total amount of votes. The election method of the legislative council is Proportional Representation thus the tactic of opposition does not fit the election as long as they maintain too many parties instead of forming one or a few parties. This will depend on the will of their masterminds. Remember all major structural changes were done via so called ''pro-establishment''.
In the last legislative council election 2016, there were 58.28 % (2,202,283 voters) of 3,779,085 voters voted. The victory of so called ''pro-establishment'' camp was due to internal division among opposition parties. In that election, total votes for ''pro-establishment'' was 871,016, 40.17% of the effective votes, 2,167,411. Opposition ''pan-democrats'' got 781,168, 36.02%. And opposition ''localists'' gained 411,893, 19.00%. Other opposition or centrist parties received 103,334, 4.81%. If they unified their candidates and parties into one opposition party, the entire Hong Kong opposition exceeds ''pro-establishment'' enormously. The total could have been 1,296,395 votes (about 59.83% of the effective votes, 2,167,411) for opposition camp. It means opposition camp is in fact the majority of the society of Hong Kong. Furthermore, the society is definitely divided into two camps politically.
The majority of the Hong Kong voters still is opposition. Unlike their complaints, pro-establishment stably mobilised their 40% organised voters in the 2019 district council election, however their main issue still is that they did not gain any new voters. This tendency will continue.
In other words, at least 40.17% of effective voters decide the majority in the legislative council of Hong Kong. This number is higher than Japan's 25% thus Hong Kong citizens of both camps are politically more conscious than Japanese voters. For the district council election, opposition united and occupied the vast majority of seats with 1,677,040 effective votes, 57.44% of the total effective votes, 2,919,622 contrary to pro-establishment's 41.32% (1,206,645 effective votes; they failed to get new voters; maintaining the 40% line is not adequate to be the majority of the council anymore). The opposition camp set the new hurdle to be the majority in the district councils of Hong Kong but also it will be the hurdle for the electoral victory of the upcoming legislative council election of 2021.
1. The most important political issue between China and US is undoubtedly the upcoming 2021 Hong Kong Legislative Council Election. Repetitive mishandling of the third wave of COVID-19 (Hong Kong is the only place where still has been under the severe epidemic among all other Chinese cities since July 1, 2020; neoliberalism in Hong Kong showed its total incompetence and anti-intellectualism on national security issues not limited in the epidemic) and opportunistic zig-zags of Hong Kong SAR government will be ultimately compensated by an inevitable electorate failure of ''pro-establishment'' camp. It can be called a nightmare for China. It's more serious and critically important than any other topics of July like HSBC collusion with US DOJ on Huawei or closures of US bank accounts of SAR bureaucrats (The convenor of unofficial members of Executive Council Bernard Charnwut Chan claimed that an American bank informed him the closure of his bank account in US in March and refunded his deposits in April thus it is no threat to both bureaucrats and citizens at all) or closures of consulates of both sides. Other topics are more like deflective tricks by US mainstream media and its administration. The core of the anti-China target is the upcoming election in Hong Kong.
The vast majorities of citizens who are part of ruling class colour politics of Hong Kong automatically link so called ''pro-establishment'' figures with Hong Kong SAR government bureaucrats. Thus ideologically voters of both camps blindly see misdeeds of Hong Kong SAR government bureaucrats as misdeeds of ''pro-establishment'' candidates. The 2019 Hong Kong District Council Election was held on time under the harassing and violence from the black shirted mobs due to SAR government's surrender to the political pressure from local vested interests which it represents. This time, again, despite of the ongoing colour revolution and COVID-19 epidemic, Carrie Lam insisted on July 19 , 2020 that the 2020 Hong Kong Legislative Council Election is going to be held on time (September 6, 2020).
It highly reflected the political scheme of the local vested interests behind her. There was some speculation that the SAR government would re-evaluate the possibility of postponement of the election at the end of July or early August. (That was right.) (1) One of the main considerations is Hong Kong voters in mainland China and other countries. There are at least 155,400 Hong Kong voters (above 18 years old) living in mainland according to the survey ''Hong Kong Residents’ Experience of and Aspiration for Taking Up Residence in the Mainland of China'' in 2009. (2)
Also this is why opposition parties still require lockdown of the border with mainland while the mainland successfully contained the epidemic, and Hong Kong evacuators to mainland via Shenzhen Bay Port (the second largest border control facility next to the Hong Kong international airport) have been increasing, especially reported 30 % increase from July 5 to July 11(total 2017 people which are the largest number since lockdown of the border in March). (3) It makes the slogan of ''lockdown of borders'' with mainland an electoral public stunt.
The third wave of COVID-19 and its mishandling by SAR government will determine the fate of ''pro-establishment'' camp in the upcoming election in September 5, 2021. It is quite grim for them due to broadly criticised incompetence of the SAR bureaucrats (symbolised by the salary of Chief Executive; 5 million 210 thousand HKD) who are higher earners among all countries besides Singapore in 2019. (4)
Hong Kong film imagery of its bureaucrats is totally falsified and purely fictional in comparison to the reality. They are enjoying only annually increasing salaries while the working class people of Hong Kong are laid off massively and easily during the colour riots and epidemic. The salary of Hong Kong bureaucrats is not determined systematically it depends solely on their free will if they decide freezing raising salaries or cut salaries according to social pressures. The society has been requiring them a kind of salary system which strictly based on their performance since 2002.
Unfortunately the SAR bureaucrats are no heroes, zeroes in the eyes of the working class people. For the conditions of the working class of Hong Kong, Australian JobsDB's census report on Hong Kong workers showed there was only average 5.1% increase of salaries specifically in PR/ clerk, digital marketing/e-commerce, and insurance companies, obviously salaries of those hot jobs are based on commissions not basic salaries. Furthermore 50% of job seekers who are under 25 yo nakedly quitted their jobs in 2019. It's no better than 2018. (5)
The unemployment rate hit the highest in a decade since 2005, 6.2% with approximately 240 thousand unemployed workers in 2019. (6)
Mishandling of the third wave of COVID-19 by the Hong Kong SAR government is mainly due to ''Exemption from Compulsory Quarantine Arrangement for inbound travellers from Foreign Places.'' The test-exempted inbound workers are proven to be the origins of the third wave of COVID-19 that SAR government distracted the attentions of citizens before a vessel MSC Flavia's nine foreign seamen (total 24 crew members and 11 crew members of the vessel infected the virus; this cluster was confirmed in Ningbo on June 26, 2020) who exempted from PCR tests got diagnosed as positive after they entered mainland on June 26, 2020 according to report from mainland custom. This was the beginning of the third wave of COVID-19.
The nine foreign seamen had stayed at Dorsett Tsuen Wan Hong Kong in Hong Kong from June 21 to 23. Centre for Health Protection did not raise alarm of the public about the loopholes of the test exemption arrangement on 33 kinds of categories of people. Furthermore, Dorsett Tsuen Wan Hong Kong is very closed to the previous outbreak point, Kerry Logistics warehouse in Kwai Chung in where four staffs infected the virus.
Hong Kong Seamen's Union claimed that no local workers employed by MSC Flavis thus nine seamen were shifted by exactly the same number of foreign seamen who had flied to Hong Kong two or three days ago then after the shift change in Hong Kong, the previous seamen took an airplane to fly back to their home country. (7)
Origins of the third wave of COVID-19 were not natural causes at all. It was mainly due to the loopholes of the SAR establishment itself.
''Exemption from Compulsory Quarantine Arrangement for inbound travellers from Foreign Places'' (On July 15, 2020 updated)
Under section 4(1) of the Compulsory Quarantine of Persons Arriving at Hong Kong from Foreign Places Regulation (Cap. 599E) (the Regulation), made under the Prevention and Control of Disease Ordinance (Cap. 599), the Chief Secretary for Administration may designate any person or category of persons fulfilling certain criteria for exemption that –
the person’s or persons’ entry into Hong Kong –
is necessary for the supply of goods or services required for the normal operation of Hong Kong or the daily needs of the people of Hong Kong;
is necessary for governmental operation;
is necessary for the protection of the safety or health of the people of Hong Kong or the handling of the public health emergency within the meaning of section 8(5) of the Ordinance concerning the specified disease; or
because of the exceptional circumstances of the case, otherwise serves the public interest of Hong Kong; or
the person’s or persons’ travelling is necessary for purposes relating to manufacturing operations, business activities or the provision of professional services in the interest of Hong Kong’s economic development.
In accordance with section 4(1) of the Regulation, the Chief Secretary for Administration has exempted the following categories of persons from the compulsory quarantine requirement.
Category of persons
#2. Crew members of goods vessels
On July 26, 2020, eight seamen from UK, Switzerland, the Philippines and India diagnosed as positive, SAR government finally announced temporary suspension of cruises and change of shift of none-goods loading or uploading seamen in Hong Kong from July 29, 2020. And seamen must remain in vessels. Foreign seamen also must submit negative PCR test results that done within 48 hours before the departure. However if they need a change of shift, they still can arrange point to point transportation for the seamen. It includes pilots. (8)
The reaction of the SAR government was extremely late. It's been a month since the report from mainland custom on MSC Flavia cluster case on June 26, 2020. Thus high efficiency of SAR bureaucrats is purely a hoax. Their score is the worse than any other third world countries they disdain.
The total number of Hong Kong's first（Approximately from January 28 to February 12） and the second （Approximately from March 14 to April 11）waves were 1259 cases but the third wave (July 1-) was 1375 cases on July 26, 2020. (9) In fact, there is no objective time consensus on the definition of the three waves but the point is that the total amount of the first and second waves must be less than the third one. It proved that the crappy SAR government is completely out of control thus they officially asked mainland for help on July 27, 2020.
Latest local situation of COVID-19 (Chinese ver. provides holistic view)
SAR government's anti-epidemic policy has a common flaw that they always set unnecessarily too long buffer period before enforcing forcible measures which immediately needed under the extreme circumstances. For instance,
the suspension of cruises and unnecessary shift of foreign seamen has to wait for more four days at the time of writing. They can spread viruses during the buffer period freely like before. It even will accelerate the shift changes during these days, intensifying the work load before the due date. In other words, it will help rapidly spreading the virus in this way. For Specified conditions imposed on inbound travellers who have visited specified high risk places (Cap.599H), it has to take a week to be effective. They set ''one week'' buffer period thus those virus carriers can spread virus during the period as same as other buffer periods on anti-epidemic measures. (10) It was announced on July 18, 2020 and has been effective from July 25, 2020. Undeniably one-week delay unnecessarily accelerated the contagion within the city. For Kazakhstan where recently reported outbreak of unknown pneumonia (later the health ministry of Kazakhstan government denied it, BBC reported on July 10, 2020. WHO considers those are undiagnosed cases of COVID-19 not something new due to low-quality testing or no testing) and the world's top number one infected country USA, it had been postponed for 11 days to forcibly restrict the inbound travellers and take their sputum samples.
Under Prevention and Control of Disease (Regulation of Cross-boundary Conveyances and Travellers) Regulation (Cap.599H), an inbound traveller who, on the day on which the traveller boarded a civil aviation aircraft that arrives at, or is about to arrive at Hong Kong (specified aircraft), or during the 14 days before that day, has stayed in any specified place (Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines and South Africa starting 0.00am on 25 July 2020; and Kazakhstan and the United States of America as additional specified places with effect from 0.00am on 29 July 2020), must provide the following documents: (11)
How SAR government deflects attentions of people from their own mistake ''test-exemption''? That is done by proactively tightening the restriction of gathering to only two people, banning eat-in at restaurants, forcing citizens to wear facial masks in interior and exterior outer spaces (the harsher measures also have its two day buffer period before enforcement) . It means that they have scapegoated its citizens during protecting 33 categories of privileged people who enjoying test-exemption and also are origins of the third wave of COVID-19. (12)
The BBC interview of a medical worker in Kazakhstan also perfectly grabbed the common phenomenon among impotent crony capitalist bureaucrats like in Hong Kong and Japan.
"They do it [to lower the total coronavirus figures] because they don't want to be in the first place for this disease," she said. "It's much easier to change statistics than to fight coronavirus." - An anonymous medical worker to BBC (13)
PCR testing is expanding recently and it's improved as experts suggesting everyday should conduct at least 7,500 tests for citizens. From July 1 to July 21, SAR government did 177,535 tests, approximately 8,454 tests per day. (14)
However the worst thing is that the originally highly fragile public medical facilities of Hong Kong are almost running out of capacities for COVID-19 patients and others. It means that none-COVID-19 patients are also dangerously excluded from the adequate medical service. The health care system is like US where drastically weakened by neoliberalism before the pandemic. There is no sizable proportion of medical facilities for ordinary people of Hong Kong. As the result, there are more than a hundred COVID-19 patients are staying at home with their families due to lack of capacities at hospitals. (15)
People's discontent on the mishandling of COVID-19 epidemic by SAR government reached the high point recently. One of the US state propaganda machine VOA (Voice of America) reported:
NDI-backed Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute did take a census on SAR government's handling of COVID-19 epidemic during July 20 to 23 by online method, inquired about nine thousand Hong Kong citizens (the majorities of them were pro-opposition but it still reflects common discontent among pro-establishment supporters). As the result, average 64% of citizens in both political camps think that the mishandling of COVID-19 by SAR government is critically responsible for the third wave of epidemic. Moreover, the SAR government who presided over the COVID-19-infested city stealthily had exempted nearly 210 thousand seamen and pilots since March to May 2020 alone. This is the true background of being the hotbed of the epidemic.
This census outcome will be potentially seen as an equivalent with the electoral result of the upcoming 2021 Hong Kong Legislative Council Election on September 5, 2021. It means that opposition will win the vast majority of seats at the legislative council because 64% of voters including opposition cabals automatically link the incompetent SAR government with so called 'pro-establishment' camp on the election. Besides this, what 'pro-establishment' camp did during the epidemic period? Almost nothing at all. People only remember Finance Committee's irresponsible decision of funding 5.4 billion HKD for almost debunked Ocean Park's developers and corrupted management on May 29, 2020 and enforcement of National Anthem Ordinance since June 12, 2020. Both of them have nothing to do with workers' economic lives and its improvement. Only beneficial for the ruling class. Pro-China forces can't win opposition in this way because SAR government and so called 'pro-establishment' camp are self-destabilising and diminishing trust of the citizens.
Note: No one noticed the origin of the third wave of epidemic and the test-exemption list until the MSC Flavia incident on June 26, 2020. Also readers must realise that there are two kinds of statistical calculation categories, such as imported cases and local cases in Chinese. SARS-COV2 is purely imported outside of Hong Kong, China. In general, all cases are imported cases. Therefore, the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic in Hong Kong was and still is the first imported case on January 18, 2020. On the contrary, January 23, 2020 was just the day when the first local resident case was confirmed. We should not be confused by their statistical trick used by SAR bureaucrats.
The census above can be seen as NDI-VOA propaganda yet it is confirmed and backed by scientific research later. RTHK reported,
First, SAR government has exempted more than 290 thousand inbound personals from PCR tests and quarantine since February to July 8, 2020. This number is higher than what VOA reported and confirmed by the government itself later.
Although SAR government diagnosed more than 100 cases per day since July 19 till July 28, 2020 (it still continues at the time of writing on August 2, 2020), and 16 deaths from July 13, they still have insisted the 33 categories of test exemption no matter how many infected or deceased. Moreover, on July 19, 2020, SAR government once stubbornly denied any notion stating that the third wave of COVID-19 epidemic originated in test-quarantine exemption policy arrangement.
In the article, ''Government clarifies on necessity of quarantine exemption arrangement'', the SAR government wrote:
With regard to criticisms that the quarantine exemption arrangement has brought about loopholes in the quarantine regime and that the latest wave of epidemic was attributable to the prevailing quarantine exemption arrangement, a Government spokesman emphasised today (July 19) that this is a misunderstanding.
The spokesman explained that the existing exemption arrangement under the compulsory quarantine regime is essential to maintain the necessary operation of the society and the economy, and to ensure an uninterrupted supply of all daily necessities to the public. The Government has been closely monitoring the risk and pressure on public health brought about by imported cases and would continue to adopt relevant coping measures in a resolute manner as necessary. ......
In addition, for the categories of exempted persons arriving Hong Kong from the Mainland, regular COVID-19 testing arrangement has been put in place for cross-boundary goods vehicle drivers and cross-boundary students which form the two largest exemption categories.
VOA did not blindly demonise all test-quarantine exempted people, especially people arriving from mainland China this time because the main virus vendors are proven to be foreign seamen and pilots not any mainlanders objectively.
On July 28, 2020, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University research team revealed that the SARS-COV2 virus strain of GR type caused the third wave of epidemic and originated in Republic of the Philippines and Republic of Kazakhstan. TVB made a comprehensive coverage on this,
研究指，新冠病毒在八個月內演變成6種不同病毒株，第一波疫情一月由內地輸入，屬於S或L型病毒株；到二月演變成V型，引發多個本地群組，包括北角佛堂、長康邨等；到三月爆發第二波疫情，確診者都帶有歐洲等地演變出的G型病毒株，傳播力加強至少3倍以上，當時的愉景灣婚禮群組就是這類患者。 至於七月的第三波疫情，病毒株已變成GR型，當中又可分開兩個群組，當中港島禮頓山的個案，基因排序與哈薩克機組人員基因排序相同；至於慈雲山、水泉澳邨等個案，則與菲律賓輸入個案相同。 理大醫療科技及資訊學系副教授蕭傑恒說：「同之前第一波及第二波的病毒株已經是非常不同，例如最初期的新發(茶餐廳)、彬記群組、港泰護老中心，他們的基因是完全一樣，即是說一隻病毒株，導致這些人受感染。」 團隊指病毒本來會不停演變，但六月底變為GR型後就再無變。 蕭傑恒表示：「物競天擇，再加一些可能有新藥時，它都會出現突變，但它現在取得一個平衡，病毒和人之間取得一個平衡，令它的傳播更有效率。」 (19)
According to the PolyU research, there are total six kinds of SARS-COV2 strains developed and found by scientists until July 2020 that S, L, V, G and GR types. In the first wave of epidemic from January 28 to February 12, S and L type strains mutated into V type strain which was confirmed at North Point Buddhist shrine, Cheung Hong Estate and Hotpot meal cluster etc.. Then, the second wave of the epidemic (March 14 to April 11) came with G type strain which is typical in Europe and confirmed on the Auberge Discovery Bay Hong Kong cases. G type's infectious rate is three times larger than the original strains. Finally, the July's third wave of the epidemic with GR type strain arrived. This time, it was completely imported via Kazakhstan pilots and Filipino seamen who exempted from PCR tests and quarantine due to the existing exemption arrangement under the compulsory quarantine regime. The Leighton Hill cluster in Hong Kong island is matched with the strain of Kazakhstan pilots; the strain of Tsz Wan Shan and Shui Chuen O Estate matched with Filipino seamen.
Mingpao provided more details on the issue that there three chains of contagion, one is Kazakhstan pilots; the one is Filipino seamen and the third one Sheung Sze Wan Village (Sai Kung) cluster's origin of GR type strain is still unknown. To make matters worse, GR type is deadlier and more contagious than previous types of SARS-COV2. (20)
On July 29, 2020, there is news (later confirmed) that the SAR government would announce one year postponement of the 2020 Hong Kong Legislative Council Election at the end of the nomination period this Friday (July 31, 2020) by applying Emergency Regulations Ordinance (1922). Opposition media Hong Kong Economic Times reported,
Postponement of the election will be correct and necessary for ''pro-establishment'' camp however new voters won't support them because they did nothing for the lives of the working class people pf Hong Kong during anti-extradition bill riots and COVID-19 epidemic. What they did were all PR stunts, foul plays with opposition, authorising billions of bailouts for corporate giants and commencement of The National Anthem Ordinance on June 12, 2020 etc.. All in an attempt to serve the ruling class in the name of citizens. For instance,
On October 16, 2019, Carri Lam published the third policy address and promised that she and her 'pro-establishment' camp are going to use Lands Resumption Ordinance to retrieve wasted lands from hands of private owners in order to develop public housing for workers. It's about both land supply and housing of the workers of Hong Kong. The lands of Hong Kong ultimately belong to the central government yet monopoly capitalist oligarchs are enjoying their hegemony and brutally exploiting workers on land and housing issues. Their astronomically huge fortunes were made out of the poor workers who desperately need housing.
19. 我提出的土地供應施政方針是由政府主導用地和基建的規劃，並為確立的公共用途收回所需的私人土地，讓市民看到不論是 短、中、長期開拓的土地，政府會全力以赴，讓土地為民所用。具體來說，我們會加快規劃，然後運用《收回土地條例》和其他適用條例，收回以下三類私人土地作百分百公營房屋(包括公屋、「綠置居」、居屋)及「首置」和相關設施發展:
(1) 可能具發展潛力，但未納入新發展區或其他發展項目， 大部分屬私人擁有的新界棕地，估計約 450 公頃，這些土地較接近現有新市鎮和主要公路及面積較大，包括位於屏山及藍地一帶棕地。規劃署會優先檢視當中的 160公頃較接近現有基建設施的棕地可否作公營房屋發展，以便於今年年底開展進一步的技術評估。改劃政府用地作房屋用途是近年房屋土地供應的主要來源之一，但我今次提出的是更聚焦地改劃私人土地作公營房屋發展，繼而行使公權收回私人土地作公共用途，是突破思維;
(3) 收回位於市區並適合作高密度房屋發展的茶果嶺村、 牛池灣村和竹園聯合村寮屋區的私人土地，以加快發展這些合共七公頃的市區用地，重建為以公營房屋為主的新社區，並透過按政策的補償安置，改善寮屋居民的居住環境。(22)
The point is that this policy was originally suggested by opposition and denied by so called ''pro-establishment' and SAR government in 2018. Their policy change was made on September 13, 2019 by chairperson of the largest ''pro-establishment'' party Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, Starry Lee and followed by Carrie Lam on October 16, 2019. (23)
Although the policy direction is right and precise under the circumstances, the problem was realised at that time that retrieving altogether 700 hectors of lands is not only a small amount of lands but also it will take twelve months to eight years to retrieve lands thus it won't relieve political tensions and urgent needs for housing immediately.
Hong Kong's housing and land supply issues are the most important ones but it needs transformation of entire economy and adjustment of population policy as many intelligentsia think. It can be summed below:
First, the raising rate of median monthly household income (家庭住戶每月入息中位數) can't catch up with rising private housing price and rent for years. For understanding economic situation of the housing and land supply issues, we must read several data below:
The latest data of May 2020 show that private rental indices of housing increased 77% since 1990; private price indices of housing raised 284.8% since 1990 and median monthly household income only gained 28,200 HKD which compared to 24,500 HKD in 2011. About 15% increase of household income in nine years. Moreover median monthly household income of 1990 was about 24,000 HKD. In other words, there is only approximately 15% increase in median monthly household income since 1990 till 2020. (25) Unbalance among the three indices indicates systematically broadening inequalities are real and almost unstoppable without thorough reforms. It's only good and prosperous for capitalists who own properties.
Second, linked exchange rate system in Hong Kong (1983) has been fixed in 7.80 HKD to 1 USD since 1990 which only slightly ups and downs between 7.75 to 7.85 HKD in relation to USD. As the result, when the exchange value of USD declines, it causes inflation in HKD side.
Hong Kong is still in inflation under the ongoing anti-extradition bill colour revolution and COVID-19 pandemic. CPI (Consumer Price Index) of 2019 was 2.86% which means about 3%. In general, above 3% is seen as inflation. This is similar with mainland China in 2019. (27)
This is the mechanism of endlessly broadening inequalities among the working class in Hong Kong. A systematic class oppression against workers by oligarchs and its bureaucrats. It proved that Carrie Lam's third policy address was just a PR stunt. Not only it did not relieve tensions among population but it also caused the world's highest housing price and top #3 high rent city records in the entire world in 2020 according to Global Living published by CBRE Group, Inc. in June 2020.
Thus the PR stunt by SAR government and DAB did change nothing, and the situation is now even worse than October 16, 2019. Oligarchs successfully maintained the skyrocketing housing prices and rent in 2019 even though there was some political friction with the central government in September 2019.
In general, they did nothing for workers in 2019. They did not improve lives of the working class. So called ''pro-establishment'' won't win the upcoming election without decent policies to improve lives of workers even under peaceful political situations after the end of anti-extradition bill colour revolution and COVID-19 pandemic.
2. In general, the intelligentsia of Hong Kong predicted the landslide failure of so called ''pro-establishment'' camp in the Legislative Council election of September 6, 2020. And they predict that ''pro-establishment'' camp will still be in crisis. The main reason is that judge Barnabus Fung's Electoral Affairs Commission insists exactly the same problematic stance and policy with the 2019 Hong Kong District Council Election (November 24, 2019). The 2019 Hong Kong District Council Election (opposition won the vast majority 389 seats; on the contrary, pro-establishment got only 86 seats) was unfairly held during the ongoing anti-extradition bill colour revolution and strongly supported by ''establishment'' figures who represent the vested interests of colonial British Hong Kong. For instance, 125 ''establishment'' figures signed a declaration to require the election being held on time even though there are black-shirted mobs still engaging in endless colour riots. November was the peak of the violence. As the result, voters got psychologically terrorised by it. This election campaign was led by ex-Financial Secretary in the Special Administrative Region ''opposition'' John Tsang Chun-wah who was defeated by Carrie Lam in the 2017 Hong Kong Chief Executive election; the 1st. Secretary for Security of Hong Kong Peter Lai; and ''Godfather of Lan Kwai Fong'' Allan Zeman who appointed Carrie Lam as Chief Executive of Hong Kong. (29)
On November 11, 2019(US time), ''opposition'' John Tsang Chun-wah shared the statement below at Facebook to threat the SAR government and ''pro-establishment'' camp from ''establishment'' side. He urged the SAR government to surrender to ongoing violence in order to end the colour riots. His anti-violence stance was disguised as ''pro-establishment'', on the contrary, it actually opposed the use of force by police, and threatened the public by more possible violent aftermath if they postpone the district council election under the unfair conditions for pro-establishment camp. His contradicted narrative belongs to pro US, anti-China opposition camp but the campaign was initiated and managed from the ''establishment'' side. This is a typical and treacherous Hong Kong political feature that never correctly understood by any mainland right wings and mainstream media.
I denounce violence. The Hong Kong Government must lead the way in de-escalating the use of force and resist postponing the District Council Elections on 24 November. Any attempt to delay the election would only prolong and escalate further violence resulting in unnecessary injuries . END VIOLENCE NOW.
For English version of the statement, please visit :
PROCEED WITH THE DISTRICT COUNCIL POLL
LET THE PEOPLE’S VOICE BE HEARD
As members from different segments of the civil society, we watch with anguish and apprehension the development in our city during the last few months – the Hong Kong society has been severely torn apart and our values being eroded day by day. It is a society urgently in need of reconciliation and the Government is duty-bound to lead us out of the deepening rift.
We consider that:
The Government must strive its utmost to ensure the smooth running of the District Council elections. There is no way the election should be interrupted or called off due to the interference of forces with ulterior motive.
A peaceful, fair and just election that abides by procedural justice principles is the entitlement of every citizen. It is also a tenable route to resolving the on-going social conflict. We call on all sectors of the community to work together to enable a smooth election.
Hong Kong is in a critical situation now. The casting of the ballot – and the electioneering activities leading up to it – is a form of civic participation that will channel the thoughts of the citizens to the Government.
A high voter turnout is of immense importance to the upcoming election. We hereby call upon the people to actively take part in the vote. This will be an important step toward resolving the predicament of Hong Kong.
Vote for Hong Kong on Nov 24!
楊區麗潔 (Project manager and public policy consultant; Hong Kong University Centre for Civil Society and Governance)
歐耀佳（Paul; ex-chairman; The Hong Kong Medical Association）
碧樺依 （Raees Begum Baig; social worker; assistant professor at CUHK）
卜約翰 （John P Burns; American; former chief of Faculty of Social Sciences, HKU）
陳智遠 (Paul Chan; ex-political assistant at Food and Health Bureau)
陳祖為 （Joseph Chan Cho Wai; a founding member of Civic Party; a professor at Department of Politics and Public Administration, HKU）
陳彩英 (social worker)
陳秀慧 (Cora Chan; Associate Professor; Deputy Head, Department of Law;
Programme Director, Bachelor of Laws at HKU)
陳葒 (founder of Principal Chan Free Tutorial World)
陳文敏 (Prof Johannes Chan Man-mun at Department of Law, HKU; being supportive of Benny Tai Yiu-ting)
陳韜文 (CHAN, Joseph Man; Emeritus Professor of Journalism and Communication at CUHK)
陳麗雲 (Chan Lai-wun; former actress at ATV and TVB)
陳龍生 (Prof. Chan, Lung Sang; Deputy Director & College Principal, HKU SPACE)
陳文剛 (Rensen Chan Man-Kong; a theatre worker)
陳茂峰 (expert of investment and financial management)
陳志雲 (Stephen Chan Chi Wan; Commercial Radio Hong Kong)
陳慧 (author; screenplay writer)
陳耀華 (MC at RTHK)
趙維生 (Sammy Chiu; professor at CUHK in social work)
蔡海偉 (Hoi-Wai Chua; Member of ''pro-establishment'' Our Hong Kong Foundation (OHKF) ; the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Council of Social Service (HKCSS))
鄭維志 (Cheng Wai-chee, Christopher; former chairman of The Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce; chairman of Wing Tai Properties Limited)
張燦輝 (Prof CHEUNG Chan Fai at University General Education, CUHK)
張楚勇 (Dr. Cheung Chor Yung; Senior Teaching Fellow at Department of Public Policy, City University of Hong Kong)
張益麟 (ex-vice chairman of Hong Kong Young Industrialists Council)
張炳良 (Prof Anthony Cheung Bing-leung; ex-chief of Transport and Housing Bureau)
張達明 (Eric Cheung; a senior lecturer at Department of Law, HKU)
張瑞霖 (Patrick Cheung; Member of ''pro-establishment'' Our Hong Kong Foundation (OHKF))
張達棠 (CHEUNG Tat-tong; Housing Authority member)
蔡玉萍 (CHOI Yuk-ping Susanne; professor at Communications and Public Relations Office, CUHK)
蔡甘銓 (a guest lecturer at Academy of Film, HKBU)
蔡堅 (head of The Hong Kong Medical Association)
莊陳有 (Chong Chan Yau; a founding member of Civic Party)
莊耀洸 (CHONG, Yiu Kwong; lawyer; an ex-assistant of Szeto Wah)
蔡子強 (CHOY, Chi-keung Ivan; a senior lecturer at Department of Government and Public Administration, CUHK)
崔允信 (CHUI Vincent; filmmaker)
鍾劍華 (Vice President at Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (HKPORI))
范寧 (John Flint; ex-CEO of HSBC)
方敏生 (ex-CEO of The Hong Kong Council of Social Service)
方保僑 (Francis Fong; pundit)
方健僑 (ex-chairman of Hong Kong Wireless Technology Industry Association (WTIA))
黃岳永 (Erwin Huang; IT educator at The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)
葉劍青 (Ip Kim Ching; psychiatrist)
江丕盛 (Chairman of Quest Institute)
關焯照 (Andy Cheuk-Chiu Kwan; chief of ACE Centre for Business and Economic Research)
郭國全 (ex-economic consultant for SAR government)
郭倩雯 (ex-journalist at TVB and Wharf Cable Television)
黎慶寧 (Peter Lai; ex-chief of Security Bureau)
黎蕭寶珍 (former-inspector general of Hong Kong Export Credit Insurance Corporation)
賴錦璋 (ex-part time member of Central Policy Unit)
林漢明 (Professor LAM Hon Ming at School of Life Sciences, CUHK)
林健枝 (LAM Kin Che: Adjunct Professor at Communications and Public Relations Office, CUHK)
林本利 (LAM Pun Lee; used to join Central Policy Unit)
林筱魯 (Urban planner who closely worked for Leung Chun-ying)
林崇智 (The Rev LAM Sung-che; pastor)
林蔚文 (Dr. Lam Wai Man at School of Arts and Social Sciences, The Open University of Hong Kong)
林維峰 (Wai-Fung (Danny) Lam; Director of the Centre for Civil Society and Governance (CCSG))
羅淑敏 (associate professor at Department of Visual Studies, Lingnan University)
羅永聰 (Julian Law Wing Chung; PR brain for John Tsang Chun-wah in the failed 2017 SAR Chief Executive Election)
李俊亮 (chief of CPAR at The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts)
李少南 (ex-professor at School of Journalism and Communication, CUHK)
李淑儀 (Sandra Birch Lee Suk-yee; ex-Permanent Secretary of Food and Health Bureau)
李詠怡 (Professor Eliza W. Y. LEE; The Department of Politics and Public Administration, HKU)
李盈姿 (Dr. Lee Ying Chi: dentist)
梁淑儀 (Irene Leung; Member of ''pro-establishment'' Our Hong Kong Foundation (OHKF))
梁文俊 (football player?)
梁萬福 (Dr. LEUNG Man Fuk, Edward)
梁敬國 (Godfrey Leung; ex-undersecretary of Commerce and Economic Development Bureau)
梁栢賢 (Dr Pak-yin Leung; ex-general administrator of Hospital Authority)
梁佩瑤 (Dr. LEUNG PUI YIU, VIVIAN)
梁崇任 (art educator)
林雲峯 (Lim Wan Fung, Bernard Vincent; former member of Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference)
盧子健 (public affair consultant)
羅慶才 (chairman of The Baptist Convention of Hong Kong)
盧龍光 (Rev. Dr. Lo Lung-kwong; ex-director of Divinity School of Chung Chi College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong)
盧偉力 (Dr. LO Wai Luk; Honorary Resident Writer at Academy of Film, HKBU)
林一星 (Professor Terry Lum; Member of ''pro-establishment'' Our Hong Kong Foundation (OHKF))
馬仲儀 (chairman of Hong Kong Public Doctors' Association [HKPDA])
馬傑偉 (ex-professor at School of Journalism and Communication, CUHK)
莫宜端 (Zandra Mok; ex-political assistant at Labour and Welfare Bureau)
吳俊雄 (honorary associate professor at Department of Sociology, HKU)
吳宗鑾 (one of convenors of Progressive Lawyers Group)
伍美琴 (Professor NG Mee Kam at Department of Geography and Resource Management(GEO), CUHK)