Violence (police)
on 9 June 2019, followed by a gathering outside the Legislative Council Complex to stall the bill's second reading on 12 June which escalated into violence that caught the world's attention.
Objectives[edit]
Initially the protesters only demanded the withdrawal of the extradition bill. Following an escalation in the severity of policing tactics against demonstrators on 12 June 2019, the protesters' objective was to achieve the following five demands (under the slogan "Five demands, not one less"):[60]
- Retraction of the "riot" characterisation: The government originally characterised the 12 June protest as "riots", it later amended the description to say there were "some" rioters, an assertion protesters still contest. The crime of "rioting" carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
- Establishment of an independent commission of inquiry into police conduct and use of force during the protests: Civic groups felt that the level of violence used by the police against protesters specifically on 12 June, arbitrary stop-and-search,[62] officers' failure to observe Police General Orders pointed to a breakdown of accountability.[63] The absence of independence of the existing watchdog, the Independent Police Complaints Council, is also an issue.[64]
Amidst frustration that police had failed to prosecute pro-government violent counter-protesters and being increasingly distrustful of police because of this,[267][268] protesters began clashing more frequently with counter-protesters. They clashed inside Amoy Garden on 14 September and then in North Point the next day.[140][269] Hard-core protesters also began to carry out vigilante attacks—described by protesters as "settling matters privately" —targeting individuals perceived to be foes.[268][267][270] Both pro-Beijing actress Celine Ma,[271] and a taxi driver who drove into a crowd of protesters in Sham Shui Po on 8 October, were attacked.[272]
For the most part there are two groups of protesters, namely the "peaceful, rational and non-violent" protesters and the "fighters" group.[303] Nonetheless, despite differences in methods, both groups have refrained from denouncing or criticising the other. The principle was the "Do Not Split"— praxis—which was aimed to promote mutual respect for different views within the same protest movement. This was a response to the failure of the Umbrella Revolution which fell apart partly due to internal conflicts within the pro-democratic bloc.[304][43]
Police modified the Police General Orders by removing the sentence "officers will be accountable for their own actions" ahead of the 1 October 2019 confrontation. Police sources of the Washington Post have said that a culture of impunity pervades the police force, such that riot police often disregarded their training or became dishonest in official reports to justify excessive force.[416] Some frontline officers reportedly believed that they were entitled to punish the "rioters", contravening rules that minimum force should be used. Police officers who felt that their actions were not justified were marginalised.[490] Police commanders reportedly ignored the wrongdoings and the unlawful behaviours of frontline riot police and refused to use any disciplinary measures to avoid upsetting them.[416] Lam's administration also denied police wrongdoings and backed the police multiple times.[491] As of December 2019, no officer had been suspended for their actions or charged or prosecuted over protest-related actions.[416] When the District Councils were passing motions to condemn police violence, police commissioner Chris Tang and other civil servants walked out in protest.[492]
Both sides claimed that rule of law in Hong Kong was undermined during the protests. While the government, the police and government supporters criticised the protesters for breaking the law and using violence to "extort" the government to accept the demands, the protesters and their sympathizers felt that selective law enforcement, selective prosecution, police brutality, and the government's blanket denial of all police wrongdoings all harmed rule of law and expressed their disappointment that the law cannot help them achieve justice.[551] The judiciary system was also scrutinised after Judge Kwok Wai-kin expressed sympathy to a stabber who attacked three people in September 2019 near a Lennon Wall. He was later removed from handling all protest-related cases.[552]
After condemning the protesters for storming the legislature on 1 July for their "use of extreme violence"[622] and defacing the national emblem during the 21 July protest,[623] Lam suggested in early August 2019 that the protests had deviated from their original purpose and that their goal now was to challenge China's sovereignty and damage "one country, two systems".[540] She suggested that radical protesters were dragging Hong Kong to a "point of no return"[540] and that they had "no stake in society".[624]
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet demanded the Hong Kong government conduct an investigation into police use of force against the protesters; she subsequently said that she was "troubled and alarmed" by the escalating violence used by the protesters.[742] Amnesty International praised the protesters for their dedication despite facing "abusive policing tactics" which include the "wanton use of tear gas, arbitrary arrests, physical assaults and abuses in detention".[743] Kenneth Roth, the head of Human Rights Watch (HRW), was denied entry to Hong Kong at Hong Kong International Airport on 12 January 2020.[i] Hong Kong officials insisted that the decision to bar Roth from entry had been made in Hong Kong, not in mainland China.[745] In June 2020, on the first anniversary of mass protests in Hong Kong, a statement released by HRW said that the governments of both China and Hong Kong should respect fundamental rights of people.[746]
On 9 July, Carrie Lam said the controversial bill "is dead", but still refused to meet the protesters' demand to withdraw it.[98][99][100] The protesters continued to demand full withdrawal of the bill, among other demands regarding alleged police misconducts and universal suffrage. The confrontations between the protesters and the police had since escalated. On 21 July, the police is accused of colluding with a gang who indiscriminately attacked passengers at Yuen Long station.[101] A poll conducted in August showed that more than 90% of supporters of the protests expressed dissatisfaction with police misconduct, and, among their five core demands, the primary demand had shifted from the withdrawal of the bill to the establishment of independent commission of inquiry.[102]
On 4 September, Carrie Lam announced that the government would officially withdraw the bill in October.[7] However, she dismissed the other four core demands from the protesters.[103]
The bill was formally withdrawn on 23 October.[9][10] Chan Tong-kai was released from prison on the same day.[104]Widespread protests are still occurring.
WKP
Comments
Post a Comment