Source: Ming Pao
Author: Fang Jinping
The China Union Office stated that it is not the restrictions of the relevant provisions of Article 22 of the Basic Law, causing the Hong Kong group to be terrified.Since then, the Hong Kong Government has issued three continuous drafts to explain. The position is insisting on the office that belongs to the bar, and rushed to the whole case to follow the statement, showing that the high -level Tama ships were in chaos.Indeed, in terms of the text, it is difficult to understand the understanding of the office that the office does not belong to the central people's government.However, since the central government has the right to interpret the basic law, no matter how much this interpretation is beyond the general recognition of Hong Kong people, there is no room for disputed under the current reality politics.However, the elastic interpretation of the legal provisions, especially this is that the mainland departments do not interfere with Hong Kong autonomy, and naturally directly shock the public's confidence in one country, two systems.At the same time when public opinion focuses on the drafting of the Basic Law, at the same time, we may also need to understand that this cheap use of the law does not start today, but has long been accustomed to the use of laws in the emperor's era and China has used the law since ancient times.What Hong Kong is engraved is not only how the central government thinks and applies the law itself, but also a set of legal traditions that are deeply rooted in China.
Since ancient times, Chinese law has been formulated and issued from top to bottom to regulate subordinates instead of restricting those in power itself.Therefore, many parts of the legal provisions are quite vague to retain technical flexibility and facilitate the scope of the scope of the application of the governing authorities to interpret or expand the scope of the scope of the provisions.Taking the foundation of the ancient Chinese legal system as an example, the legislature is the imperial court of Beijing.The emperor issued an order with the court and the court. Once he was awarded the empire, he had to follow, and it was difficult to obtain.In the Tang Dynasty's laws, various provisions were also written.For example, in order to ensure national security, Tang Lu must not leak the national confidential terms, saying that those who leakage the major events should be secretly crimes.But what is a big deal?The law has a slight note refers to major events, saying that the puppet conspiracy and arrests are arrested, that is, about the crusade of the thief or the news of the rebellion, and so on.These intelligence should be confidently influenced by the government to influence the people's hearts and official deployment in the people.However, these two are not the whole of the major events. There are the words such as the provisions. To sum up the situation that has not been listed, the government can decide the meaning of the national secrets by themselves.In the Ming and Qing laws of the Tang Dynasty and the later Ming and Qing dynasties, there are endless uses. It can be seen from the regulations from the rebels to the folk marriage, all of which are convenient for the government.What's more, since the law of Tang to Qing, there is still so -called should not be the rules, that is, in addition to the law of law, if the government finds that any reason it should be appropriate, it can be punished.Elastic space controls the people.
Today, although the emperor system has become a history, China's power pattern has not fundamentally changed, and the legal system is still awarded from top to bottom.As the National People's Congress of the Legislative Government, the Party Central Committee is also absolutely controlled by the Party Central Committee. It is not a parliament that can challenge the ruling authorities in modern political system.In this context, the writing of China's legal provisions is like the era of the Emperor's system. It is full of interpretation space for the convenience of the governing authorities.In 2000, the State Council's notice of the State Council issued by the State Council issued by the Hong Kong News Agency Hong Kong Branch and the name of the Macau Branch stated in the future.In addition to assisting the mainland departments to manage Chinese -funded institutions in Hong Kong, it also includes other matters assigned by the Central People's Government, which is the same as in ancient laws.Whether it is the rarely heard by Volkswagen and Hong Kong before and the supervision of Hong Kong's governance, there will be any task and power of the central government in the future.
The legal spirit that acts cheaply is the issue of the relationship between the China Union and the Basic Law.Although the government did not think that the office was set up by the office until a few days ago, there were already different voices in the establishment camp.In 2016, Song Xiaozhuang, a scholar who repeatedly explained the official view of the Basic Law on the mainland, wrote in the Hong Kong Grand Press that the China United Nations Office was not under 22 organs.It represents the central government, not the departments of the central people's government.In addition, as parties have mentioned that in 2018, Zeng Yucheng, former chairman of the Legislative Council, also put forward similar claims in his Hong Kong vision plan research report.In any case, the issue of the China United Affairs Office and the ownership of the Basic Law have not explained that Beijing has not explained since the transfer of sovereignty in Hong Kong. Even the understanding of the Hong Kong government has conflicts with the office, indicating that this is a very vague area in the Basic Law.How to cause this may only be clear to the disclosure of various government archives or records in Japan.However, from the perspective of the great history, I am afraid that since the era of the Emperor's system, the central government hopes to retain its convenience and flexibility in governance, and deliberately leave the inertia of the interpretation of the space: in the past, when the management of Beijing in Hong Kong, the governance of Beijing, the governance of Beijing, Beijing, and Beijing.In order to appease Hong Kong people and international emotions, although it is not clear, the authorities may initially have no precise and consistent ideas for the ownership of the Basic Law.After various political conflicts and considerations recently, in order to declare the control of Hong Kong, it is so to perform regulations.In fact, according to the senior current affairs commentator Liu Ruishao wrote in 2015, when the Basic Law was drafted, Li Hou, then deputy director of the Hong Kong and Macao Office, told him that the spirit of drafting the central government should be pine and not tight.At the time, reserved a larger space still coincides with the tendency of legal use in tradition.
In short, the current state -of -the -art office has a self -evidence, and it can even go back to the habit of ancient Chinese law.If so, everyone should not be surprised today, and in the future, the central government may make similar cheap interpretations on law to meet their needs, and Hong Kong people should have a corresponding consciousness.However, today Hong Kong people generally trust the value and system of separation of power, and it is difficult to accept that the ruling authorities can collect power through elasticity.As a normal legal area, Hong Kong pays attention to the meticulous norms of legal provisions in order to clearly regulate the power and responsibilities of all parties.Although the court also considers the original legislation, it should not be explained and interpreted by the beyond articles, otherwise all parties of the society will feel at a loss of compliance with laws and regulations.In fact, the value gap between the value of the two places understands each other, and Fang needs one country and two to make a central balance.At that time, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in Deng Xiaoping may hope that with the development of mainland China in the future, the distance is closer to each other.Regardless of the intention of the China United Nations Office, its declaration on the status of the basic law will spread the two places on the table without concession on the value of the law and the system.Although Beijing may no longer mind.
