Wong Tai-hoi, secretary general of the Taxi Drivers and Operators Association and a Hong Kong Island constituency registered voter, on Tuesday filed a petition for judicial review, challenging the constituency returning officer's decision to let Au Nok-hin run in the Legislative Council by-election on Sunday, which Au won. Wong said Au cannot possibly uphold the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region because he publicly burned a copy of the Basic Law in a protest in 2016, an act of utter hatred obviously. Wong said Au had also publicly sung a song advocating "Hong Kong independence".

Let's get all the relevant facts straight first: On Nov 7, 2016, the National People's Congress Standing Committee issued an interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law to clarify questions on the qualification of public office holders in Hong Kong after several legislators-elect put on a show of resentment toward the People's Republic of China, the HKSAR as well as the Basic Law while taking the LegCo oath on Oct 12.

Au admitted on a radio talk show that he had burned a copy of the Basic Law in protest against the NPCSC interpretation of Article 104. In his own defense Au claimed he had always upheld the Basic Law. He must mean he upholds the Basic Law conditionally or selectively, because he obviously hates the NPCSC's interpretation, an exercise of its constitutional right to do so that is enshrined in the Basic Law, under Article 158. By openly demonstrating his disrespect for the right and authority of NPCSC, Au has unambiguously declared his insubordination to the Basic Law.

The NPCSC interpretation of Article 104 - which applies to oath-taking by public officers including principal officials, lawmakers and judges - states that upholding the Basic Law and pledging allegiance to the HKSAR as part of the PRC "are not only the legal content which must be included in the oath prescribed by the article, but also the legal requirements and preconditions for standing for election in respect of or taking up the public office specified in the article". By virtue of the NPCSC interpretation, Au has lost his eligibility to run for public office because he does not genuinely uphold the Basic Law.

Furthermore, according to the Constitution of the PRC, the NPC made the Basic Law; and the NPCSC is the highest legislative body of the PRC. Clearly, Au burned a copy of the Basic Law to show his resentment toward the NPCSC's interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law because it basically shut the door on separatists seeking to hold public office in the HKSAR. Can anyone in their right mind reconcile with the notion that such a person will truly uphold the Basic Law? Many people were convinced Au and those disqualified lawmakers-elect are birds of a feather, which is why he was so mad about the NPCSC interpretation in the first place.

(HK Edition 03/15/2018 page9)