Xinhua defines criteria for patriotic and unpatriotic

Following Professor Xia Yong's article on 22 February, Xinhua news agency released on 24 February the most precise definition from mainland scholars so far of what 'patriotic' entails in the context of Hong Kong and 'One Country Two Systems'. The criteria are outlined as:

u Pledging allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR;

u Loving both China and Hong Kong, promoting the Basic Law and supporting China's resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong;

u Supporting 'One Country, Two Systems', and thus upholding the Central Government and the socialist system on the mainland;

u Meeting Basic Law requirements for office.

These criteria apply to the Chief Executive, the principal officials, executive and legislative councillors and judges.

Xinhua singled out some current and potential legislators who through various activities were contravening this "patriotic principle" and their oaths to uphold the Basic Law. It stated that "some people continue to participate [in] or even lead political organisations aiming at opposing the leadership of the Communist Party and subverting the Central Government, using democracy as a shield."

The article criticised as examples of such "unpatriotic" or even "subversive" behaviour those people who engaged in supporting independence for Taiwan or inviting foreign forces to interfere with the internal affairs of the mainland. It continued that those who thwarted the national security legislation should not be allowed to "usurp" the power of the SAR. This view is endorsed by a commentary in the China Daily on 25 February which discusses the importance of patriotism to the concept of maintaining 'Two Systems' favourable to the motherland. This piece embraces the principle of long-term democratic reform as prescribed by the Basic Law, but warns the people who, "under the banner of "returning the political power to people", are doing their utmost¡K to change the election methods for the chief executive and the legislature earlier than planned. They are trying to destroy the principle of gradual progress, even participation and an executive-led government, and want to fish in troubled waters to usurp the governance power of the SAR." The outcome of this, concludes the article, would be that "Hong Kong people themselves [would] suffer".

The response from democratic representatives in Hong Kong has been one of surprise and rejection. Szeto Wah, chairman of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of the Patriotic Democratic Movement in China, dismissed the accusations, saying "Is Xinhua a court? It is only a news agency, and we don't have to care about the article." Similarly, The Frontier's Emily Lau Wai-hing, criticised for her involvement in a forum in Taiwan organised by pro-independence groups, averred that this would not affect her decision to respect the wishes of the Taiwanese public. She stated that she had "not a clue what Xinhua was talking about".

The Secretary for Constitutional Affairs, Stephen Sui-lung, however, said that he believed "it is up to individuals to reflect on the positions that they are taking."