'Beijing Interpretation Possible Over Filibustering'

Executive councillor Ronny Tong has suggested that Beijing could step in to counter pro-democracy lawmakers’ delaying tactics in Legco by reinterpreting the Basic Law and defining whether or not such behaviour amounts to disloyalty to the SAR.

Tong, who is also a senior counsel, made the comment on Tuesday amid media reports that the National People’s Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) is planning to pave the way for some pan-democratic legislators to be disqualified for filibustering

Tong said making frequent quorum calls at Legco meetings would not be in itself a breach of allegiance to the SAR, but the matter becomes “debatable” if the delaying tactics seriously hinder or even paralyse the work of the legislature.

He said “there is room” for the NPCSC to re-interpret Article 104 of the Basic Law which stipulates that public officers must swear allegiance to Hong Kong.

Beijing interpreted the provision in 2016 over the oath-taking controversy involving Youngsipration pair Sixtus Leung and Yau Wai-ching, stating that public officials who take an oath must be sincere.

But speaking on an RTHK programme, Tong said currently there isn’t any definition as to what behaviour constitutes a violation of the oath.

“Many people kept testing the bottom line of the central government in the past few years. So the central government has the responsibility to draw clearly, one by one, its bottom lines. You get what you want,” he said.

“I can see that there may well be a need to define clearly what would constitute not upholding the Basic Law in the sense that if you filibuster to an extent that brings to a complete standstill the operation of Legco, it becomes very difficult for the people to accept that you’re still upholding the Basic Law or being loyal to the SAR,” he told RTHK’s Wendy Wong.

But Tong said he hoped the NPCSC would not create another mechanism whereby lawmakers could be disqualified.

He said Article 79 of the Basic Law already stipulates that a lawmaker can be censured for misbehaviour or breach of oath, by a vote of two-thirds of members.