|
The "democrats" are trying to defend Martin Lee's decision to give testimony at a hearing of the US Senate, saying that it was just a common exchange.
Washington enacted the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act in 1992, treating Hong Kong affairs as if they were those of its 51st state. The legislation enables the US to comment wantonly on the HKSAR's affairs and there are even provisions for imposing sanctions on the territory. The person who has made this piece of legislation possible is none other than Lee.
This remnant of British colonialism worked with American rightist politician Jesse Helms to cook up this law. This is ironclad proof of his treacherous acts and his role as a pawn of the US in coercing China. Shortly after Lee had attended the hearing, US officials said that Hong Kong's constitutional development might jeopardize Sino-US relations.
What is the function of US congressional hearings? Under both the Senate and the House of Representatives, there are special committees that are in charge of legislative affairs. Each of the committees has the power to convene periodical hearings in which witnesses may be summoned to testify. Their testimonies are put on record as the basis for legislation or for the country to take action as required by the law.
Lee's participation in the hearing was anything but an equal exchange of lawmakers. In fact, Lee's attendance turned him into a Hong Kong citizen beholden to the US, which treated the exercise as if it held sovereignty over the city.
Disregarding the sovereignty of his own country, Lee allowed the issue of Hong Kong constitutional development to come under the scrutiny of US Congress. There can be nothing more wrong to have done.
It is a glaring violation of the Basic Law as well as the oath Lee took when being sworn in as a member of the Legislative Council -- to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the HKSAR.
According to Article 79 of the Basic Law, legislators are liable to face impeachment and even removal from office for misconduct or violation of their oath.
It is hard to imagine that an American congressman would attend hearings held by foreign parliaments that were intended to enact laws to intervene in internal affairs of the US. Any congressman making such a move would definitely be subject to disciplinary actions from Congress.
Members of parliaments of different countries can very well conduct exchanges with proper authorization.
But no lawmakers will be allowed to take the internal affairs of their countries to overseas parliaments for deliberation.
When Lee Cheuk-yan, ignoring such common sense, echoed the remarks of US officials by saying that their testimony at the hearing consisted of common exchanges, he was actually trying to cheat the general public, an act that was very immoral.
(China Daily March 9, 2004)
|
