Advertisement

The Political Context of Post-1997 Hong Kong Higher Education

  • Wing-Wah LawEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Governance and Citizenship in Asia book series (GOCIA)

Abstract

This chapter presents the political context of Hong Kong higher education under China’s rule, since 1997. This context is marked by increasingly intricate interactions and conflicts between Hong Kong and CPC-led mainland China. It shows that, in addition to worries about increased economic integration and dependency on mainland China, and escalated social integration of and conflicts with mainlanders, Hong Kong has faced three major political challenges to the “one country, two systems” principle, as it concerns the politics–university relationship; perceived threats to freedoms of speech and publication, and to media independence and pluralism; the clash between Hong Kong’s common law tradition and the mainland’s civil law tradition; and China’s increased political control over Hong Kong, and deliberate delays in introducing universal suffrage. These political concerns involve many Hong Kong people’s direct conflicts with the Hong Kong and central governments, resulting in tense central–local relationships and severe internal divisions between Hong Kong people. Both Hong Kong people and the central government see these conflicts as a challenge to the principle of “one country, two systems” and the Basic Law.

References

  1. Au, A., Chu, C., & To, Y.-M. (2018). Self-censorship systematised and RTHK feared dried up. In Hong Kong Journalists Association (Ed.), Candle in the wind – National security law looms over diminishing freedoms (2018 annual report) (pp. 16–29). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Journalists Association.Google Scholar
  2. Bland, B. (2017, February 4). Hong Kong in a corner after China’s raid on Xiao Jianhua. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/71a7583e-e9fb-11e6–967b-c88452263daf.
  3. Chan, J. M. M. (1995). Time is running out: The endangered legal system. In J. Y. S. Cheng & S. S. H. Lo (Eds.), From colony to SAR: Hong Kong’s challenges ahead (pp. 71–90). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chan, J. M. M., & Kerr, D. (2016). Academic freedom, political interference, and public accountability: The Hong Kong experience. AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom, 7, 1–21.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, L. (2010). The historical development of the civil law tradition in China: A private law perspective. Legal History Review, 78(1–2), 159–181.Google Scholar
  6. Cheng, K. M. (1996). Efficiency, equity and quality of higher education in a time of expansion. In M. K. Nyaw & S.-M. Li (Eds.), The other Hong Kong report (pp. 409–418). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cheng, T. (2018). Secretary for justice’s speech at ceremonial opening of the legal year 2018. Hong Kong: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  8. Cheung, B. L. (2009). Public management reform in Hong Kong. In S. Goldfinch & J. L. Wallis (Eds.), International handbook of public management reform (pp. 317–335). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  9. Cheung, T. (2016, March 26). Dropping word ‘National has been official practice for years, serving and former Hong Kong officials confirm. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education-community/article/1930612/dropping-word-national-has-been-official-practice.
  10. Cheung, G., Cheung, T., Ng, J., Ng, T., So, P., & Wan, A. (2014, October 30). Liberal leader defiant as he resigns. South China Morning Post, p. A3.Google Scholar
  11. Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. (2017). Zhongguo Renmin Zhengzhi Xieshang Huiyi Quanguo Weiyuanhui Changwu Weiyuanhui Gongzuo Baogao [The Work Report of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Standing Committee]. Beijing: Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.Google Scholar
  12. Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. (2018). Zhongguo Renmin Zhengzhi Xiesheng Huiyi Zhangcheng [The Charter of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference]. Beijing: Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.Google Scholar
  13. Chow, N. W. S. (1995). Social welfare: The way ahead. In J. Y. S. Cheng & S. S. H. Lo (Eds.), From colony to sar: Hong Kong’s challenges ahead (pp. 393–411). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Chung, K. (2018, April 6). Delegates face more demands in Beijing. South China Morning Post, p. C2.Google Scholar
  15. Court of Final Appeal. (2018). Between secretary for justice and Wong Chi Fung, between secretary for justice and Law Kwun Chung, between secretary for justice and Law Kwun Chung. Hong Kong: Court of Final Appeal.Google Scholar
  16. Curriculum Development Council Textbook Review Committee. (1998). Xiuding Keben de Jiben Yuanze [Guiding Principles for Revising Textbooks]. Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Council.Google Scholar
  17. Democratic Movements of China Resources Center. (1990). Bajiu Zhongguo Minyun Baozhang Guanggao Zhuanji [Newspaper advertisements on the democratic movements of China 1989]. Hong Kong: Democratic Movements of China Resources Center.Google Scholar
  18. Deng, X. P. (1989). Zai Jiejian Shoudu Jieyan Buduijun Yishang Ganbu Shi De Hianghua [Address to officers at the rank of general and above in command of the troops enforcing martial law in Beijing]. In Central Committee of Communist Party of China Document Editorial Commission (Ed.), Deng Xiaoping Wenxuan, 1982–1992 [Selected Work of Deng Xiaoping, 1982-1992] (pp. 302–308). Beijing: Renmin Publication House.Google Scholar
  19. Electoral Affairs Commission. (2016). Report on the 2016 Legislative Council general election. Hong Kong: Electoral Affairs Commission.Google Scholar
  20. Electoral Affairs Commission. (2017). Report on the 2017 chief executive election. Hong Kong: Electoral Affairs Commission.Google Scholar
  21. Fong, B. C. H. (2014). The Partnership between the Chinese Government and Hong Kong’s Capitalist Class: Implications for HKSAR Governance, 1997–2012. The China Quarterly, 217, 195–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foreign & Commonwealth Office, United Kingdom. (2017). Six-monthly report on Hong Kong: January to June 2017. London: Foreign & Commonwealth Office.Google Scholar
  23. Forsythe, M., & Mozur, P. (2017, February 11). A Video, a wheelchair, a suitcase: The mystery of a vanished tycoon deepens. New York Times, p. A5.Google Scholar
  24. Friends of Hong Kong Association Limited. (2017). Xuexiao Jiangzuo Xiangqing [Detail on School Talks]. Retrieved from http://www.fhka.com.hk/zh-hant/tsdetail.
  25. Global Times Editor. (2016, January 6). Xianggang Shushang Peihe Diaocha Zhenshi Bei Chaozuo Waile [Hong Kong Booksellers Assisting in Investigation Was Speculated and Distorted]. Huanqiu Shibao [Global Times]. Retrieved from http://opinion.huanqiu.com/editorial/2016-01/8323385.html.
  26. High Court. (2018). Constitutional and administrative law list No 1160 of 2018: Between Leung Chung Hang, Sixtus and president of legislative counsel and secretary for justice. Hong Kong: High Court.Google Scholar
  27. Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office. (2017, December 28). Guanyu Pizhun Neidi Yu Xianggang Tebei Xingzhengqu Guangyu Zai Guangshengang Gaotie Xijiulong Zhan Sheli Kouan Shishi Yidi liangjian De Hezuo Anpai De Jueding (Caoan) De Shuoming [Explanations on the draft decision of the standing committee of the National People’s Congress on approving the co-operation arrangement between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region on the establishment of the port at the West Kowloon station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong express rail link for implementing co-location arrangement]. Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily], p. 6.Google Scholar
  28. Hong Kong Bar Association. (2005). The acting chief executive’s request for NPCSC interpretation of Article 53 of the Basic Law of the HKSAR - statement of the Hong Kong Bar Association. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Bar Association.Google Scholar
  29. Hong Kong Bar Association. (2016). Statement concerning the interpretation made by National People’s Congress Standing Committee of Article 104 of the Basic Law. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Bar Association.Google Scholar
  30. Hong Kong Bar Association. (2017). Statement of the HKBA dated 28 December 2017 on the decision of the NPCSC of 27 December 2017 on the co-operation agreement. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Bar Association.Google Scholar
  31. Hong Kong Government. (2003). National security (legislative provisions) bill. Hong Kong: Printing Department.Google Scholar
  32. Hong Kong Government. (2014). LCQ21: Appointments of non-official members to advisory and statutory bodies. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.Google Scholar
  33. Hong Kong Government. (2015). Highlights of the HKSAR government’s proposals for selecting the chief executive by universal suffrage. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.Google Scholar
  34. Hong Kong Government. (2016a, July 1). Government responds to July 1 procession. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201607/01/P201607010633.htm.
  35. Hong Kong Government. (2016b, June 20). Transcript of remarks by CE and S for S. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201606/20/P201606200446.htm.
  36. Hong Kong Government. (2017a). The chief executive’s 2017 policy address: We connect for hope and happiness. Hong Kong: Government Logistics Department.Google Scholar
  37. Hong Kong Government. (2017b, October 6). HKSARG responds to US report. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201710/06/P2017100600082.htm.
  38. Hong Kong Government. (2017c). Our Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Logistic Department.Google Scholar
  39. Hong Kong Government. (2017d, December 29). Response of the HKSAR government on co-location arrangement. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201712/29/P2017122900853.htm.
  40. Hong Kong Government. (2017e, September 14). Response to UK report on Hong Kong. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201709/14/P2017091400653.htm.
  41. Hong Kong Government. (2018, November 6). Response by CS at UNHRC universal periodic review meeting. Retrieved from https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201811/06/P2018110600982.htm.
  42. Hong Kong Journalists Association. (2014). Press freedom under siege (2014 annual report). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Journalists Association.Google Scholar
  43. Hong Kong Journalists Association. (2016). One country, two nightmares: Hong Kong media caught in ideological battleground (2016 annual report). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Journalists Association.Google Scholar
  44. Hong Kong Journalists Association. (2017). Two systems under siege (2017 annual report). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Journalists Association.Google Scholar
  45. Independent Police Complaints Council. (2012). Final report on complaint cases against the police arising from the visit by the Vice Premier Mr. Li Keqiang. Hong Kong: Independent Police Complaints Council.Google Scholar
  46. Kraar, L., & McGowan, J. (1995, June 26). The death of Hong Kong. Fortune. Retrieved from http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1995/06/26/203948/index.htm.
  47. Lam, C. (2017). Connecting for consensus and a better future: Manifesto of Carrie Lam chief executive election 2017. Hong Kong: Campaign Office of Carrie Lam.Google Scholar
  48. Lam, J. (2018, January 1). Lam slams critics of co-location as ‘Elitist’. South China Morning Post, p. A1.Google Scholar
  49. Lam, J., & Lau, C. (2018, January 3). Checkpoint deal must be one-off: Bar chief. South China Morning Post, p. A3.Google Scholar
  50. Lam, P. (2018). Speech of the Chairman of the Hong Kong Bar Association at the Opening of the Legal Year 2018 (8th January 2018). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Bar Association.Google Scholar
  51. Lammert, C. (2010). Quebec: Between founding nation and sovereignty. In K. Ikas (Ed.), Global realignments and the Canadian nation in the third millennium (pp. 29–143). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
  52. Law, W.-W. (2017). Higher education in post-1997 Hong Kong: Politics, academic freedom, and civic engagement. In G. Postiglione & J. Jung (Eds.), The changing academic profession in Hong Kong (pp. 39–75). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lee, J. C. Y. (1995). The civil service. In J. Y. S. Cheng & S. S. H. Lo (Eds.), From colony to SAR: Hong Kong’s challenges ahead (pp. 39–50). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Li, F. (2013). Zai Xianggang Lifahui Bufen Yiyuan Zuotanhui Shang De Jianghua [Speech at a seminar with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government’s senior official on Universal Suffrage, 22 November]. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.Google Scholar
  55. Lin, L. (2006). The Chinese model of the rule of law. Frontiers of Law in China, 10(4), 657–669.Google Scholar
  56. Lo, A. (2016, March 23). Leave Taiwan affairs in hands of Beijing. South China Morning Post, p. A2.Google Scholar
  57. Lo, C.-K. (1996). Constitution and administration. In M. K. Nyaw & S.-M. Li (Eds.), The other Hong Kong report (pp. 1–11). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Lo, S. S. H. (1995). Legislative cliques, political parties, political groupings and electoral system. In J. Y. S. Cheng & S. S. H. Lo (Eds.), From colony to SAR: Hong Kong’s challenges ahead (pp. 51–70). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Ma, G. (2018). Chief justice’s speech at ceremonial opening of the legal year 2018. Hong Kong: Judiciary.Google Scholar
  60. Miller, T., Kim, A. B., & Roberts, J. M. (2018). 2018 index of economic freedom. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.Google Scholar
  61. Ming Pao Reporter. (2017, June 23). Tung Chee-hwa: 23 Tiao Li Bucheng Zhongyan Qi Jiexin [Tung Chee-hwa: Central authorities began to doubt after the failure in Article 23 legislation]. Ming Pao [Ming Pao News], p. A1.Google Scholar
  62. Ming Pao Reporter. (2018, June 2). Teshou Sansi Shisanju Shouzhang Ju Gebie Biaotai [The chief executive and her officials refused to comment]. Ming Pao [Ming Pao News]. Retrieved from https://news.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20180602/s00001/1527937163075.
  63. National People’s Congress. (1990). The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. Hong Kong: HKSAR Basic Law Advisory Committee.Google Scholar
  64. National People’s Congress. (2018). Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Xianfa [The constitution of the People’s Republic of China, amended in March 2018]. Beijing: National People’s Congress.Google Scholar
  65. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (1999). Guanyu Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Xianggang Tebie Xingzhengqu Jibenfa Di Ershier Tiao Di Si Kuan He Di Ershisi Tiao Di Er Kuan Di San Xiang De Jieshi [Interpretations of Article 22 (Paragraph 4) and Article 24 (Paragraph 2, Item 3) of the Basic Law of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the People’s Republic of China]. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  66. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2004a). The decision on relevant issues concerning methods for selecting the HKSAR chief executive in 2007 and for forming the Legislative Council in 2008. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  67. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2004b). Quanguo Remin Daibiao Dahui Changwu Weiyuanhui Guanyu Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Xianggang Tebie Xingzhengqu Jibenfa Fujian Yi Di Qi Tiao He Fujian Er Di San Tiao De Jieshi [The interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of Article 7 of Annex I and Article III of Annex II to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China]. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  68. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2005). Deliberation on the State Council’s proposal on requesting interpretation of paragraph two, Article 53 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  69. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2007). Guanyu Xianggang Tebie Xingzhengqu 2010 Nian Xingzheng Zhangguan He Lifahui Chansheng Banfa Ji Youguan Puxuan Wenti De Jueding [Decision concerning the method for the selection of the chief executive and Legislative Council in 2012 and the problems related to universal suffrage]. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  70. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2014). Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui Changwu Weiyuanhui Guanyu Xianggang Tebei Xingzhengqu Xingzheng Zhangguan Puxuan Wenti He 2016 Nian Lifa Hui Chansheng Banfa De Jueding [Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on issues relating to the selection of the chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region by universal suffrage and on the method for forming the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2016]. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  71. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2016). Interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Beijing: National People’s Congress Standing Committee.Google Scholar
  72. National People’s Congress Standing Committee. (2017, September 28). Guanyu Pizhun Neidi Yu Xianggang Tebei Xingzhengqu Guangyu Zai Guangshengang Gaotie Xijiulong Zhan Sheli Kouan Shishi Yidi liangjian De Hezuo Anpai De Jueding [Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on approving the co-operation arrangement between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region on the establishment of the port at the West Kowloon station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong express rail link for implementing co-location arrangement]. Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily], pp. 4, 6.Google Scholar
  73. Ortmann, S. (2015). The umbrella movement and Hong Kong’s protracted democratization process. Asian Affairs, 46(1), 32–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Path of Democracy. (2017). One country two systems index. Hong Kong: Path of Democracy.Google Scholar
  75. Path of Democracy. (2018). “One Country Two Systems” overview: Public survey and index construction: Second report. Hong Kong: Path of Democracy.Google Scholar
  76. Public Opinion Programme, The University of Hong Kong. (2018a). Appraisal of freedom of speech - Half-yearly average (6/2/2018). Hong Kong: Public Opinion Programme.Google Scholar
  77. Public Opinion Programme, The University of Hong Kong. (2018b). People’s trust in the Beijing central government - Half-yearly average (30/1/2018). Hong Kong: Public Opinion Programme.Google Scholar
  78. Public Opinion Programme, The University of Hong Kong. (2018c). People’s trust in the HKSAR government - Half-yearly average (30/1/2018). Hong Kong: Public Opinion Programme.Google Scholar
  79. Qiao, X. Y. (2013). Zai Xianggang Lifahui Bufen Yiyuan Zuotanhui Shang De Jianghua [Speech at a seminar with some members of the Legislative Council, 24 March]. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.Google Scholar
  80. Radio Television Hong Kong. (1989, July 13). Beiai Di Xianggangren [Sad Hong Kong people]. Kengqiang Ji [Hong Kong Connection].Google Scholar
  81. Radio Television Hong Kong. (2018, May 28). San Zhong Shang [Three leftist publishers]. Hong Kong Connection. Retrieved from http://www.rthk.hk/tv/dtt31/programme/hkcc/episode/494749.
  82. Reporters Without Borders. (2017). 2017 World press freedom index. Paris: Reporters Without Borders.Google Scholar
  83. Seymour, M. (1998). Quebec and Canada at the crossroads: A nation within a nation. Paper presented at the London School of Economics, 21 January, London.Google Scholar
  84. State Council. (2014). The practice of the “One Country, Two Systems” policy in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press.Google Scholar
  85. Tong, R. (2018, January 3). Dereliction of duty. South China Morning Post, p. A11.Google Scholar
  86. United States Congressional-Executive Commission on China. (2017). Annual report 2017. Washington, DC: Congressional-Executive Commission on China.Google Scholar
  87. Vásquez, I., & Porčnik, T. (2017). The human freedom index 2017. Washington, DC: Cato Institute.Google Scholar
  88. Wang, Z. (2006). The Roman law tradition and its future development in China. Frontiers of Law in China, 1(1), 72–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wong, Y.-C. (2004). Introduction. In Y.-C. Wong (Ed.), “One Country, Two Systems” in crisis: Hong Kong’s transformation since the handover (pp. 1–8). Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  90. World Justice Project. (2018). Rule of law index, 2017–2018. Washington, DC: World Justice Project.Google Scholar
  91. Xi, J. (2017, July 2). Zai Qingzhu Xianggang Huigui Zuguo Ershi Zhounian Daohau Ji Xianggang Tebie Xingzhengqu Diwujie Zhengfu Jiuzhi Dianli Shang De Jianghua [Address at the meeting celebrating the 20th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to the motherland and the inaugural ceremony of the fifth-term government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region]. Renmin Ribao [People’s Daily], p. 2.Google Scholar
  92. Yip, X. B., Yu, G. Y., & Yu, A. F. (2000). Hudong Zhongguo Lishi [Interactive Chinese history] (2nd ed. Vol. III). Hong Kong: Manhattan Press.Google Scholar
  93. Yu, G. Y., Liang, Y. M., & Chen, W. M. (1994). Zhongguo Lishi [Chinese history] (Vol. III). Hong Kong: Manhattan Press.Google Scholar
  94. Zhou, X., & Tsang, E. (2017, February 2). Tycoon ‘helping inquiries’ over market turmoil. South China Morning Post, p. A1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationUniversity of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations