• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 2022

A good story persuades people to act. The mobilizing power of a story, however, does not necessarily rely on informational fidelity. During political unrests, word-of-mouth can intermix facts with unverified claims and emotional outrage, often transforming reality into convincing rumor stories. This rapid communication article discusses how rumor publics (dis)approve and participate in 2019 Hong Kong Protests. This survey study finds that police injustice and brutality were the predominant themes of the collected rumor stories, although some stories contained mixed views or anti-protest claims. Rumors of police injustice and brutality were associated with less negative attitudes toward the protests, especially when respondents believed the story. The relationship between rumor stories and protest participation was less obvious, except for rumors about an individual protester's whereabout. This study discusses the ways in which rumor is embedded in contentious political processes.

• Journal of Sinology and China Studies
• /
• v.81
• /
• pp.227-256
• /
• 2019

Hong Kong's protests, which began in June 2019 with Anti-Extradition Bill Protests, have already lasted for months, and the demonstrations have a significant impact on China and Hong Kong as a whole. The protests began in opposition to the Hong Kong government's revision of the extradition bill, but in substance, it has a strong nature as a test of China's "One Country Two Systems" policy. Since the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative District on July 1, 1997, the primary legal norm between China and Hong Kong is the Basic Law of Hong Kong. However, conflicts of legal standards have occurred frequently due to the difference between socialism and the capitalist legal system, and there has been a continuous controversy over the interpretation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong. Moreover, the core of the legal conflict between China and Hong Kong has always been China's "One Country Two Systems" policy. This paper examined the issues related to the "Right of Legal Interpretation" of Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, the characteristics and interpretation rights of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, the direct election system of the administrative minister, the implementation of the universal suffrage, and the legislative issues of the application of Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law. Furthermore, this paper also investigated the laws and systems newly introduced by China to solve these legal conflicts. The integration of the legal system of the divided state is a complicated process beyond the combination of the legal system by integrating the multiple legal systems that have separated for a long time under heterogeneous political, economic, and social networks. Moreover, the adjustment and integration of various legal systems under the premise of a single Constitution is the starting point for the actual inclusion of various fields after the unification as well as unification process and provides a basis for achieving full integration. Therefore, the unification of the divided countries should be the first step in a long journey toward becoming a practical one, not a goal itself. It is crucial to reduce trial and error and cost, and achieve stable unification in our unification process in Korea, by learning lessons from the contradictions and conflicts that appear in the "One Country Two Systems" unification between China and Hong Kong.

• Analyses & Alternatives
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.59-85
• /
• 2019

The Hong Kong's Anti-Ordinance Amendment Movement is the most serious radical social movement since the 1997 return, which has served as the promotion of the 2014 Occupy Central Movement and broken through the violence baseline. The movement came from a criminal case committed in Taiwan,which gave a good reason and motivation for the HK government to amend the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance. The HK government has responded to the protests by strictly limiting the legal scope and transfer procedure, even giving up the legislative motion. But the protests still say no and develop into the constantly violent activities. Many of the protests have committed the crimes in HK laws,part of whom have been arrested,prosecuted and under judicially judged. It is necessary for the offenders to be punished to protect the authority of rule of law in HK. Two different paths for HK have fought against each other since the 1997 return: one is the "democratic-welfare" path taken by the Pan-Democratic Camp, the other is the "Legal-development" path taken by the Pan-Establishment Camp. The second path shares some nuclear characteristics of the so-called The China Model mainly shaped from the 40-years Reforms and Openness. However, the HK people can't understand the China Model very well and show great fear and distrust on the judicial system of Mainland China. The foreign powers such as US and UK have illegally interfered the HK issues which are deemed to be the domestic affairs of China. The so-called Sino-UK Joint Declaration can't serve as the legal basis for the interference. Taiwan, as a part of China, also plays a negative role in this movement for its electoral and political interest. Up to now, the movement has gone down and the HK government has the legal capacity to solve the problems under the supports from the central government and the HK people. The HK people love its rule of law and order under the constitutional framework of One Country Two System. After the movement,One Country Two Systems will be go on, and the integrated development under the policies of the central government will be the main stream. However, the relevant problems exposed by this movement muse be checked and solved legally and strictly,especially concerning the social inequality and youth development.