4th October 2019 – (Hong Kong) The 18th Citizens’ Press Conference was called yesterday evening in the light of multiple news reports that the Hong Kong Government has unilaterally bypassed legislative processes to implement an ‘anti-mask’ law. The spokesperson at the Citizens’ Press Conference said that this draconian law will cause further adverse impact on the government. Their speaker, Mr Chan, had this ominous warning for the Hong Kong Government: ‘if you want us to burn, be our guest. If you dare realise the vision of ‘scorched earth’, go on and kill this city: the economy and our international status along with it. We may no longer have anything to lose, but be careful what you wish for: if you take us down, we will be sure to take you down with us.’

Mr Chan began by briefly mentioning yet another evil law that this government is imposing on this city by force: the anti-mask law. Mr Chan reiterated that this Government has clearly misjudged and underestimated the sheer strength and determination of Hongkongers, and stressed that this Government shall not succeed in using this law to instill fear in Hongkongers. Mr Chan also stressed the collective wisdom of Hongkongers and our firm adoption of the ‘No Derision, No Division, No Denunciation’ principle. Despite the Government’s desperate attempts to divide and conquer, we will always remain fully united in our common quest for democracy and freedom. Mr Chan then juxtaposed the 70th birthday of the Chinese Communist Party against the city-wide mourning on the same day – an 18 year old schoolboy was tragically shot in the chest by a member of the state-sponsored terrorist organisation that calls itself the Hong Kong Police Force. This young schoolboy was far from being the only victim.

Mr Chan went on to stress, in the strongest and most unequivocal terms, that this ‘pathetic’ Government can rest assured that their anti-mask law will be disobeyed with full passion, because Hongkongers have nothing left to lose. Mr Chan also pointed out the stark hypocrisy of this law: if the Hong Kong Police Force can act with impunity by covering their faces, warrant cards and ID numbers, so that their officers who shoot to kill cannot be identified, what right does the Hong Kong Government have to tell us we cannot wear masks? This comical hypocrisy gives Hongkongers legitimate ground to disobey this ‘law’.

Mr Chan proceeded to use historical examples to illustrate his point – as he put it, ‘history repeats itself’. Anti masks laws in the past have only caused more bloodshed in the midst of revolution. Mr Chan reminded the Hong Kong Government to recall the story of the Ukraine – their government also tried to impose an anti-mask law to stamp out protests. The ironic result was that it ended up uniting its people even more defiantly against the government. The law that banned helmets and masking did nothing to terrorise its people. Instead, it only served to fuel the already raging fire of revolution against the brutal totalitarian regime. Not only did the law topple the totalitarian government, the heartless and merciless perpetrators who were part of bringing about terror and injustice were tried and purged. South Korea prior to its democratisation told a similar tale. The Hong Kong Government would be well advised to learn this lesson from history: in the face of a defiant and fearless people, oppression always backfires and results in the downfall of the oppressor.

Mr Chan continued to say that when it came to the implementation of laws, dictatorships could not be compared with democracies. Pro-Beijing individuals have tried to defend the anti-mask laws by arguing that some democracies also have this law; Mr Chan offered a crisp rebuke: that these countries are democracies. Their law-makers were voted in by the people. The same cannot be said for the Hong Kong Government or the Legislative Council, and therefore any attempts to draw such a parallel is absurd and illogical.

Mr Chan referred to barristers Martin Lee and Margaret Ng, who have questioned the legitimacy of invoking the Emergency Regulations Ordinance, and warned it was unconstitutional. He cited Articles 27 and 28 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, which safeguard ‘the freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration.’ He also warned the Government’s intention of making regulations based on the Emergency Regulations Ordinance was unconstitutional: according to Article 73 of the Basic Law, the right to enact laws belongs to the Legislative Council.

After mentioning the unconstitutional disqualification of election candidates, Mr Chan asked the justification of the Hong Kong Government in ‘bulldozing all over the Legislative Council and raping the Basic Law’. Mr Chan warned that implementation of an emergency law would even more firmly establish the totalitarian regime of the Hong Kong-Chinese Government. He reiterated that the Government’s violations of the rule of law will ensure they bear responsibility for the fall of Hong Kong’s legal system, as well as its economic status as an international financial center.

He stated that the five demands of protesters are guaranteed by Hong Kong’s Basic Law, a document the Hong Kong Government has violated and disregarded. He challenged the Government’s right to ask its citizens respect the ‘one country’ principle, when the government does not respect ‘two systems’. Our speaker reiterated that ‘the day the emergency law is declared is the dying day of the ‘one country, two systems’ principle’. He then made an appeal for international humanitarian help, stating that ‘Hongkongers have nothing but our bare flesh against the guns and riot gear of this tyranny’.

Mr Chan concluded by stating that in the face of this evil law, Hongkongers would never bow down or give in: ‘if this Government wants us all to burn, we will make sure this Government burns with us. If we are taking a trip to hell, we shall make sure our government comes with us – and stays there too.’