In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Encroachments on Civil Society 163 C H A P T E R S E V E N Encroachments on Civil Society IF AN AUTONOMOUS AND STRONG civil society can check the arbitrary power of an authoritarian state, in the process of which increasing the likelihood of changing an authoritarian regime, it is inconceivable that the non-democratic governments will not do something against it. It is common for autocrats to restrict civil liberties, deny space for public discussions, and harness media freedom. In this light we should expect, with the Central Government and the SAR government unwilling to grant full democracy in the short to medium term, the SAR state would devise means to limit the growth and activities of the civil society. Hong Kong is special in this respect, however. First of all, the Basic Law guarantees the full set of civil liberties. The international community sees the preservation of various freedoms of Hong Kong as the major benchmark by which they judge if the principle of “one country, two systems,” and hence the promises in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, is being upheld. Economic freedom, freedom of information and press freedom are also seen as vital advantages of Hong Kong over other cities in the region, including over mainland cities, serving the basic economic goals of both the SAR and Central Governments. Secondly, the Basic Law does promise a gradual progression to full democracy in Hong Kong, no matter how slow it is, which accords much legitimacy to democratic values. This is different from other non-democracies (e.g., military dictatorships or communist regimes) which can dismiss democracy or freedom as Western constructs that are not suitable for the host society. Thirdly, Hong Kong did not have a strong tradition of state-led penetration into society during the colonial era. Although state control over society existed in various forms, the colonial state seldom acted pro-actively to transform the Hong Kong society, and non-intervention was hailed as one of the most important governing virtues and principles of the colonial state (Goodstadt, 2004, pp. 12–13). Many in Hong Kong and elsewhere believe that the various freedoms of Hong Kong are the pillars of its success, and the government should leave the people (and hence the civil society) alone for Hong Kong to continue its successful course. 164 Political Development in Hong Kong This of course does not mean those in power in Hong Kong do not want to rein in the civil society. They only have to do it in a subtler way. They want Hong Kong to maintain its outlook as a capitalist haven with the full set of civil liberties being respected. They need to show that the SAR government and the Central Government are in principle supportive of democracy and further democratization, and tolerant of political opposition, press criticisms, and all peaceful dissidence. But they do want to constrain the civil society to forestall challenges to the state, and to weaken the political and social forces that push reforms against the government’s wishes. This chapter discusses attempts to control, limit and encroach on the civil society, some of which originated from the SAR state. By discussing only the mass media, civil liberties, and the control on civil society organizations (CSOs), the list of control mechanisms is never meant to be complete. It only provides a spectacle through which readers can catch a glimpse of the state-society relations in Hong Kong. The mass media battlefront Colonial legacy Any serious study on Hong Kong’s media in early colonial years will reveal that its reputation as a free press haven was overstated. As early as in the nineteenth century, journalists William Tarrant and George Ryder were jailed on charges of criminal libel after reporting on government corruption (Cheung K.Y., 2000, p. 191). While the Chinese-language press in the early colonial era was mostly concerned with news and affairs in China, the colonial government worried that the nationalistic sentiments might spark anti-colonialism feelings and threaten he r rule (Cheung, A.S.Y., 2003). The colonial government had in place quite a few draconian laws that could be used to curb press freedom.1 Writing in 1972, Shen (1972, p. 31) counted as many as 30 laws that could be used against the media, laws that gave the authorities sweeping powers to control, search and punish news organizations for publishing articles deemed seditious or antigovernment . For the most part of colonial history, these...

Share