With the opening of a new academic year, the public pays its attention to the order on campus with the hopes of seeing no repetition of any of last year's incidents of "politicalisation". Reality does not accord with hopes, however. At the school opening ceremony in a secondary school, the president of student union called out "turning your back on the national flag without the need to care about decency". The ghost of "independence for Hong Kong" haunted the campus of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) once again. This is regrettable and even more outrageous.
Among others, on the first day of the school year on Monday, some banners advocating "independence for Hong Kong" had appeared on CUHK campus, and the school authorities had them removed. But yesterday morning, some banners and posters with the independence theme appeared again in the middle of Cultural Plaza and on the Student Union's notice board. The university's Office of Student Affairs reacted promptly, writing to the Students Union to point out that any advocacy of "independence for Hong Kong" was a breach of Hong Kong's laws and against the university's constant stance against "independence for Hong Kong", and to demand the banners and posters be removed immediately. But Student Union president Au Tsz-ho told the media that they not only would not remove them but would stand by overnight to prevent authorities from removing them.
It must be pointed out that the incident is serious in nature and intolerable in a society with the rule of law. The banners and posters advocating "independence for Hong Kong" found on CUHK campus at least violate laws and regulations at two levels. One is the CUHK's regulations and its rules on using campus facilities. The Student Union is part of the university structure not an "independent kingdom". Since school authorities have clearly demanded the removal of the banners and posters advocating "independence for Hong Kong", the Student Union must obey rather than resist and refuse to carry out the order. Otherwise it must be punished for openly violating school regulations. More importantly, openly advocating "independence for Hong Kong" on the campus of a university violates not just school regulations but laws as well.
As pointed out by officials with the Education Bureau and personages from the legal sector upon inquiry yesterday, that "The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is an inalienable part of the People's Republic of China" is the clear-cut stipulation in black and white of Article 1 of the Basic Law; and according to Hong Kong's Crimes Ordinance, any person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable for a first offence to a fine of $5,000 and to imprisonment for 2 years, who utters any seditious words, or prints, publishes, sells, offers for sale, or displays any seditious publication. In regard to the appearance of banners and posters advocating "independence for Hong Kong", the police could take action and make prosecutions.
When a new school year just begins, some university students - who do not cherish their opportunities for studying, are not grateful for their families' painstaking cultivation and have no senses of nation and civil responsibility – plunge into the political mud of "independence for Hong Kong", defying school regulations and challenge the law to spread "independence for Hong Kong" on campus. They retort when advised by school authorities and refuse to obey. Such university students and young people must be made to bear the consequences of violating regulations and laws, so that they could possibly wake up and stop going forward along the erroneous road.
As a matter of fact, were individuals such as Joshua Wong Chi-fung, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, Alex Chow Yong-kang destined to break laws making trouble in Hong Kong and go to jail? The answer is not necessarily so. Had there been serious and strict requirements and regulations to pull them back before they walked toward the law-breaking abyss, instead of letting the opposition and Apple Daily exalt them high into the skies, they might not have slid down along the erroneous road and had eventually to pay a price of defaming the records of their lives.
Today, an inescapable and urgent issue before every secondary school principal and university vice-chancellor, as a responsible educator, is whether to produce more Joshua Wong Chi-fungs or prevent any student from becoming another Wong Chi-fung. The answer is self-evident.
06 September 2017
