Martin Lee's 'testifying' a grave deception
 Updated: 2004-03-11 08:47

Hong Kong legislator Martin Lee's recent so-called "testifying" before the US Senate constituted the gravest deception of its hearers and the whole world, said three commentaries in Hong Kong.

The three commentaries issued by the Hong Kong China News Agency from March 8 to 10 enumerated a lage number of facts to show that by "testifying" before the US Senate, Lee's real intention was to influence certain US figures to put pressure on China and make the internal affairs of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) an international issue, said the commentaries.

Lee's speech before the US Senate, scripted by a foreigner, intended to create the impression that Hong Kong's democracy had met problems and rule by law and freedom were endangered, that China's central government wasn't complying with its commitments to the Sino-British Joint Declaration and that it was necessary for foreign forces to interfere in Hong Kong, said a commentary titled "The Central Government's Compliance With the 'One China, two Systems' Should Not be Denied".

The commentary said since 2000, Britain, the United States and the European Union had repeatedly affirmed the smooth running of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong and the Chinese government's faithful compliance with its promises to Hong Kong.

Commenting on Lee's demand for implementing universal suffrage in electing the chief executive and all members of the legislativecouncil of the HKSAR by 2007, which he raised before the US Senate,another commentary titled "Ensuring the Hong Kong Political SystemDevelops in line with the Principles of the Basic Law" reminded the readers that Hong Kong people had never enjoyed political democracy in terms of suffrage and the right to be elected under the colonial rule of Britain.

It was only in 1991, when the British Government was about to hand over Hong Kong to China, that the British Government allowed direct elections of a small portion of legislators, said the commentary.

The commentary said taking into consideration of the history and status quo of Hong Kong, Chinese leaders and experts of the mainland and Hong Kong did a five-year research and listened to views from all sides in formulating principles on the development of democracy in Hong Kong in accordance with the lines of "one country, two systems".

The commentary said Martin Lee trumpeted reform of Hong Kong's political system in 2007 in accordance with the Basic Law.

The Basic Law only contained provisions that allow Hong Kong people and the central government to consider the development of Hong Kong's political system step by step in line with practical conditions when approaching 2007. It does not stipulate how the chief executive would be elected after 2007 and how the legislators of the Legislative Council would be elected after 2008

The commentary said democracy was the common aspiration of humankind, but it is by no means true that only universal suffragein electing the chief executive and legislators conform to the standards of democracy.

The evolution of Hong Kong's political system must not be separated from Hong Kong's history and reality and the original intentions of the Basic Law, the commentary said.

Titled "The True Face of 'Patriot' Martin Lee", the third commentary said Lee pretended to be a patriot, but actually his deeds run counter to those of a patriot.

The commentary said Lee had once gone to the United States to profess opposition to China resuming exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, called on all countries to impose trade sanctions against China, burned copies of the Basic Law in public, asked theBritish government not to leave fiscal reserves to the future HKSAR government in his capacity as then chairman of Hong Kong's Democratic Party, defended the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia in the hall of HKSAR's legislative council, employedanti-China politicians in the US as his assistants and obeyed their words.

The commentary asked: Which of the above acts could make him a "patriot"?

It said the title of a patriot is not won by empty words, but actual deeds and it was a consensus of the vast Hong Kong people to allow patriots run Hong Kong.

Martin Lee posed himself as a representative of Hong Kong people, but what he actually stood for were only an extremely tinynumber of elements that intend to disrupt Hong Kong. The 6.8 million Hong Kong countrymen that love both the motherland and Hong Kong did not like their company, the commentary said.

(People's Daily Online)

Close