Home 一國兩制
Is 'One Country, Two Systems' 1.0 Still Relevant? Upholding Freedom
After twenty-eight years of turmoil and the endless misinterpretation by the Chinese and Hong Kong governments, many believe that 'One Country, Two Systems' and the Basic Law are outdated and their reputations are bankrupt. The future development of Hong Kong is seen as a choice between two extremesThose who hold such extreme views are not without reason. Many things were originally good but have been damaged beyond repair or are at least no longer suitable for public relations. The functional constituencies of the Legislative Council are an example. The original intention of functional consti'One Country, Two Systems' has fallen into this public relations crisis. Due to years of misinterpretation and past failures, many believe that 'One Country, Two Systems' is bankrupt or was always a scam. We do not see it this way because independence or integration are extreme options. Returning toFirst, the Basic Law was originally a constitution that upheld freedom, judicial independence, and various freedoms, including freedom of speech. In addition to numerous provisions protecting human rights, it importantly established Hong Kong's semi-independent status, meaning that except for foreigMoreover, while independence may seem the best option to protect Hong Kong's own interests, it is merely an idealistic notion lacking a realistic foundation. Take Taiwan as an example; despite long-term support from the United States and the natural barrier of the Taiwan Strait, and having been sepaFor instance, the recent controversy over Li Ka-shing's sale of the Panama Canal container terminal: the Basic Law originally established private property rights:The protection of property rights under the Hong Kong Basic Law mainly comes from the following provisions:Article 6: This article stipulates that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kong) enjoys a high degree of autonomy, including the right to protect private property under its own legal system, provided it does not violate the Basic Law. Specifically, this means Hong Kong can enact its oArticle 105: This article provides that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall protect the right of private property, including that lawful property shall not be unlawfully encroached upon, and prohibits the expropriation of property unless it is for public needs and compensation is made The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall protect the right of property and prohibit unlawful infringement of property.In the case of expropriation of property, it must be for a reasonable and necessary public purpose, and compensation must be paid according to fair standards.Article 16: This article regulates the legislative power of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, allowing Hong Kong to enact laws according to its actual situation, but the legislative process and content must not violate the requirements of the Basic Law, including the protection of propertIn short, Articles 6 and 105 of the Hong Kong Basic Law are the main provisions protecting property rights, emphasizing respect for and protection of private property, as well as the necessary procedures and compensation requirements for expropriation.The Basic Law provisions generated by AI above essentially boil down to two principles: 1) Prohibition of unlawful infringement of property. That is, the rights of ownership, transfer, and income from property must be protected. 2) Even if private property is expropriated or destroyed for reasons ofAs for preventing the central government from further misinterpreting and covertly amending the Basic Law, we believe it is sufficient to add or re-emphasize two or three articles:1) The Basic Law is written in Hong Kong's two official languages—English and Traditional Chinese. If there are discrepancies between the Chinese and English versions, the English version shall prevail.2) The interpretation of the Basic Law by the National People's Congress (NPC) is limited to foreign affairs and military matters, and can only be requested by judges of the Court of Final Appeal. Neither the NPC nor the Hong Kong executive and legislative organs can unilaterally request or implemen3) Like constitutions around the world, the Basic Law is only used to limit and interpret government power. There is no situation where citizens or any legal persons violate the Basic Law.*The yellow part was written by ChatGPT4
Red Pill Editorial Team
4 months ago
Joshua Wong Arrested Again While Serving Sentence: A Grim Symbol of One Country, Two Systems' Total Collapse
On June 6, 2025, Joshua Wong, Hong Kong’s most recognizable young pro-democracy activist, was arrested again while already serving a prison sentence. He was charged under the National Security Law (NSL) for allegedly colluding with foreign forces during a period between July and November 2020. The aThe new charges carry the maximum penalty of life imprisonment.Though technically not a violation of the principle of double jeopardy, the act of doubling up charges against Joshua Wong—years after the alleged acts occurred and while he is still serving time—reveals the regime’s true intent: to ensure that he never leaves prison, and to wipe away any remaining I Knew Joshua Wong Before the World DidI first came to know Joshua Wong in 2012, when he was still a teenager. That year, he rose to prominence by leading the movement against the Hong Kong government's proposed "Moral and National Education" curriculum—a thinly veiled brainwashing project. He was the head of Scholarism, a student group Over the past 13 years, I have witnessed his growth—from a high school student to an international voice for Hong Kong’s freedom. That voice is now being silenced not only by physical incarceration, but by a regime determined to bury his influence forever.Political Lawfare Dressed as JusticeWong is currently serving a 56-month sentence stemming from his involvement in an unofficial democratic primary in 2020, which authorities claim violated the NSL’s subversion clause. He was due to be released in early 2027.But the regime clearly has no intention of allowing that to happen.The new NSL charges, dropped from above like a sword of Damocles, now threaten him with life behind bars. They relate to the same general time period as his current charges, yet are being re-packaged under different legal terminology to extend his captivity indefinitely.This is not justice. This is authoritarian engineering of judicial outcomes.The practice of stacking charges—of returning to prosecute an already-imprisoned activist for events in the same historical arc—destroys the world’s confidence in Hong Kong’s legal system. It is clear to all observers that the law has become a tool of oppression, not a guardian of fairness.A Vanishing HopeJoshua Wong’s fate is starting to resemble that of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the 11th Panchen Lama, who was taken by the Chinese government in 1995 at the age of six and has not been seen since. Though Wong may not be physically disappeared, he is being disappeared in another way—through confinement, siBut I won’t forget. None of us should.The Death of One Country, Two Systems—and of Hong Kong as We Knew ItThis is more than the destruction of one young man’s future. This is the symbolic death of "One Country, Two Systems"—a promise made to the people of Hong Kong and the international community that has been shredded in front of the world’s eyes.Once, Hong Kong stood as a proud international city, governed by the rule of law, open society, and civil liberties. Today, it is a city where political prisoners languish for acts of speech, where laws are rewritten to serve the interests of power, and where even the memory of resistance is criminaThe world is watching, and the conclusion is clear: Hong Kong has no future as a free city under the current regime. The doubling of charges against Joshua Wong isn’t just a legal maneuver—it’s a moral indictment of a system that has chosen control over conscience.Joshua Wong's story is not over, but it has reached a chapter that reflects the sorrow, rage, and despair of an entire generation.We must remember him. We must speak his name. And we must continue the fight he helped begin.
錢志健
2 months ago
Copyright ©2025 Fortress Hill Media limited. All rights reserved