Phil C. W. Chan

Opinion | Why Hong Kong protesters are forcing university leaders to pick a side – academic freedom is at stake

Behind public support for the protesters is the realisation that Hong Kong has paid a steep price for silence over policies that pushed integration with the mainland

University leaders’ failure to speak up on the extradition bill and during the early days of the protests does not bode well for academic freedom

Reading Time:4 minutes

Why you can trust SCMP

Phil C. W. Chan

Published: 9:00am, 6 Nov 2019Updated: 9:18am, 6 Nov 2019

One of the factors distinguishing the ongoing protests in Hong Kong, now in their 22nd week, from the 79-day “umbrella movement” in 2014 is the level of general support protesters continue to receive from residents and non-protesters. This is all the more remarkable considering the duration of the current unrest, the extent of violent actions to which protesters have resorted and the frequent use by the police of tear gas, beanbag rounds, rubber and live bullets, and water cannons.

It is this general support that contributes to the government’s failure to quell the protests, even after Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor announced the formal withdrawal of the extradition bill on September 4.

Not only are the protests the biggest challenge to the Communist Party since the handover and Hong Kong’s worst post-war catastrophe, they embody a seismic shift in terms of how Hongkongers define and identify ourselves, institutions of power in the city, relations between Hong Kong and the mainland (and mainlanders), and the nature of Hong Kong society. Hong Kong will never be the same again, even after the protests eventually end.

Reasons for this general support can be traced, in part, to a tacit acknowledgement by the older generations that we did not speak up when we should have. After the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration in 1984 and the crackdown on Tiananmen Square protesters in 1989, Hongkongers with means, and those working in the colonial government, police or military, emigrated to other countries, while those who couldn’t resigned ourselves to the handover.

Since July 1997, with the exception of the Article 23 protests in 2003, Hongkongers have acquiesced in government policies that aimed at Hong Kong’s total and complete integration with mainland China. This includes the disqualification of pro-democracy legislators and electoral candidates, and the “co-location” of Hong Kong and mainland immigration officials at the West Kowloon high-speed railway station, while Beijing continues to deny Hongkongers universal suffrage promised in Articles 45 and 68 of the Basic Law.

The “umbrella movement” failed because Hongkongers could not put up with being unable to get to work or get home as fast as we would like.