Skip to main content

On the Impossibility of Hong Kong “De Jure Independence”

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Critique of Hong Kong Nativism
  • 388 Accesses

Abstract

The oath-taking farce that took place on 12 October 2016 in the Legislative Council Building totally exposed the extremism of the pro-independence camp. On 5 March 2017, Prime Minister Li Keqiang mentioned in his work report that “Hong Kong Independence” leads to nowhere, showing the world the Chinese government’s determination against “Hong Kong Independence.” As a sort of marginalized separatist trend of thought, “Hong Kong Independence” spreads quickly in Hong Kong society, especially mid- and high schools, after the bleak ending of the “Occupy Central Movement.” This kind of ideological trend, a mixture of xenophobia, populism, racialism, and extremism, is “deadly attractive” to teenage students who know little about the society and their motherland. Nonetheless, “Hong Kong Independence” is not accepted by the mainstream of Hong Kong society, because most of Hong Kong residents do not see “Hong Kong Independence” as an option: the massive condemnation of the “Mong Kok Riot” proves that extreme moves are not appreciated by the Hong Kong society. Hereafter, in order to gain more support from the society, “Hong Kong Independence” advocates start to promote “legal and legitimate” sort of “Hong Kong Independence,” i.e., Hong Kong “De Jure Independence.” According to the proponents, the “De Jure Independence” of Hong Kong is lawful, both explicit and civilized; if the authorities decide to suppress it, they could only adopt extralegal means (Joseph Lian Yi-zheng 2016). This kind of plea, of course, has been widely criticized, a mainland scholar put forward legal strategies to cope with “De Jure Independence” of Hong Kong (Wang Liwan 2017). Whereas, it appears to the author that the so-called De Jure Independence of Hong Kong is, ultimately, a trick of doublespeak, without any chance of possibility. Revealing the impossibility of Hong Kong “De Jure Independence” helps exposing the lie of the pro-independence camp and, in the same time, contributes to constructive dialogue between Hong Kong and the mainland.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See “Explanations on Draft Interpretation of Article 104 of Basic Law of Hong Kong SAR,” http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-11/08/c_135812367.htm

  2. 2.

    FACV 10/1999.

  3. 3.

    FACV 26/2000.

  4. 4.

    HCAL 185/2016.

  5. 5.

    DCCC 710/2016.

References

  • Anonymous (2016) Our 2047. Undergrad, Finale Issue

    Google Scholar 

  • Brian Leung (2014) CSSA restriction revocation dispute and local political community. Undergrad 2:24–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Carl Schmitt (2005) Constitutional theory. Shanghai People’s Publishing House, Shanghai, p 5

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan Ya-ming (2014) An outburst of the age: Hong Kong democratic independence. Undergrad, September Issue, 30–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Duanhong (2016) Understanding Hong Kong politics. Peking Univ Law J 5:1125–1148

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan Lei (2017) On the theoretical connotations, manifestation and countermeasures of ‘Taiwan independence by constitutional interpretations’. Cross-Taiwan Strait Stud 1:41–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho Hei-wai (2016a) The basic law is scarred and battered Hong Kong people must enact a new one. Undergrad, April Issue, 57–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho Hei-wai (2016b) Setting things right Hong Kong decolonization: on the conditions of Hong Kong independence. Undergrad, August Issue, 50–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack Lee (2014) Should Hong Kong have the right of national self-determination? Undergrad 2:34–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph Lian Yi-zheng (2012) Passport and nationality: on Hong Kong people becoming national minority. Hong Kong Econ J. 2012–01–06

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph Lian Yi-Zheng (2016) Whole city focus on Hong Kong Independence eggs infiltrated high walls. Hong Kong Econ J. 2016-07-25

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung Mei-fun & Chang Chak-yan (2017) Self-determination is not allowed by the law. Bauhinia 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Qi Ju Shi (2014) War is coming better know the situation. Undergrad, September Issue, 39–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Lui Ceong-nang and Victor Wong (2017) Hong Kong independence on decline Hong Kong bids farewell to political extremism. Asia Wkly 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakade Hitsujiko (2016) On the possibility of Hong Kong getting kicked out of China. Undergrad, Finale Issue

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian Fang (2008) Constitutional democracy and the design of referendum. Polit Sci Law 5:81–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Tso Hiu-nok (2014) Behind Hong-Konger is the whole cultural system. Undergrad, February Issue, 31–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Liwan (2017) The evolutionary trend and legal Response to the thought of ‘Hong Kong Independence’. Hong Kong Macao J 1:13–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Yu (2015) Legal consideration of ‘Hong Kong is a nation’. Hong Kong Macao J 1:24–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong Chun-kit (2014) Nativism is the only way for Hong Kong people’s struggle. Undergrad, February Issue, 27–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong Hok-ming (2016) Seeing Hong Kong independence ethos from the legal perspective. Mingpao Daily. 2016-09-08

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan Kin-wa (2014) Evaluating Hong Kong independence from the military politics perspective. Undergrad, September Issue, 36–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Xiaoshan (2016) On the prevention of the joint actions of ‘Taiwan independence’ and ‘Hong Kong independence’. Acad J One Ctry Two Syst 4:114–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Zou Pingxue (2009) A discussion about the interpretation mechanism of Hong Kong basic law. Leg Sci 5:119–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Yezhong, Zhu Jie (2007) A study on the ‘constitutional reform’ in Taiwan. Hong Kong Social Sciences Press, Hong Kong, p 378

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Guobin (2008) Legislative interpretation and article 158 of the basic law. Chin J Law 2:3–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Guobin, Tian Feilong (2016) Independence is not an option for Hong Kong. Ta Kung Pao. 2016-10-19

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Guobin, Zhang Xiaoshan (2016) Is the interpretation a strike to Hong Kong rule of law. Ta Kung Pao. 2016-12-06

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zhu, J., Zhang, X. (2019). On the Impossibility of Hong Kong “De Jure Independence”. In: Critique of Hong Kong Nativism. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3344-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3344-6_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3343-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3344-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics