Criticism can be two-way street

Criticism can be two-way street

Mary Ma
Friday, October 26, 2012

Elsie Leung Oi-sie and Kemal Bokhary are different in that she's a Basic Law adviser to the mainland, while the latter is a retired Court of Final Appeal justice.

However, the two share something in common - both are well respected in legal circles despite their opposing opinions.
This high regard has little to do with their political stances. It's more about their readiness to speak their mind and stand by their views.
In contrast, the vigorous exchanges between pro-Beijing and pan-democrat members of the Legislative Council's legal services panel are despicable.
The pro-Beijing contingent may have gone too far in slamming the pan- democrats for formenting "white terror" because they accused Leung of criticizing the SAR's judiciary for knowing too little about Hong Kong's relationship with Beijing.

For shouldn't the pan-democrats be allowed their right to criticize?

Similarly, it's equally appalling for the pan-democrats to take Leung to task over what she said in public.

It reminded me of what happened when an Italian court convicted seven scientists of manslaughter for failing to give sufficient warning to the public about the killer earthquake that hit central Italy in 2009. It's a ruling riddled with absurdity. If the Italian court is right, nobody would speak up then.

The ongoing debate over Leung's public remarks shows a degree of absurdity. What's wrong with her making her views known - even if she's a Basic Law adviser? It's ludicrous for the Civic Party's Claudia Mo Man-ching to deny Leung her right to free speech because of her position.

Chen Zuo'er, the former deputy director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, said people should be alert to a growing pro- independence sentiment in Hong Kong.

Chen may have been worried about rising hysteria against mainlanders, but he should also know it's impossible for the city to be independent. Beijing can handle the situation well - right?

Nonetheless, the debate helps shed light on two important aspects that politicians appear to be mixing up: the rule of law and freedom of expression. When Bokhary said he was concerned the rule of law was clouded by "a storm of unprecedented ferocity," it's unlikely he was referring to Leung. If WikiLeaks' records are accurate, Bokhary always held a high opinion of Leung, and thinks she's performed her role of protecting the "one country, two systems" arrangement for Hong Kong well.

Both freedom of expression and rule of law are important and can coexist. Criticism alone cannot erode the rule of law in an open society like the SAR, where people enjoy perhaps the world's widest internet access and are guaranteed the free flow of information.

In such an environment, people's awareness of their rights will only increase, and they won't allow the rule of law to be eroded.

The judiciary here is also very professional. It's hard to imagine our independently-minded judges will be influenced by remarks by Leung, or other ranking officials.

As long as society is free and information flow isn't inhibited, there will always be respect for the rule of law.